Assessment of function related to vision (AFREV)

Ophthalmic Epidemiology

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 67-80

  Altangerel, Undraa ^a   Spaeth, George L ^a   Steinmann, William C ^b  

^a WILLS EYE HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b TULANE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Activities of daily living; Contrast sensitivity; Glaucoma; Visual acuity; Visual function; Visual performance assessment

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; BINOCULAR VISION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MONOCULAR VISION; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RASCH ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF REPORT; STANDARD; TASK PERFORMANCE; VALIDATION STUDY; VISION; VISION TEST; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 33644745125     PISSN: 09286586     EISSN: 17445086     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09286580500428500     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. Feinstein A, Josephy B, Wells C. Scientific and clinical problems in indexes of functional disability. Ann Intern Med. 1986;105:413-420.
2. Guralnik JM, Branch LG, Cummings SR, Curb JD. Physical performance measures in aging research. J Gerontol. 1989;44(5):M141-146.
3. Salive ME, Guralnik J, Glynn RJ, et al. Association of visual impairment with mobility and physical function. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994;42(3):287-292.
4. Tinetti ME, Williams TF, Mayewski R. Fall risk index for elderly patients based on number of chronic disabilities. Am J Med. 1986;80(3):429-434.
5. West SK, Rubin GS, Munoz B, et al. Assessing functional status: correlation between performance on tasks conducted in a clinic setting and performance on the same task conducted at home. The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project Team. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1997;52(4):M209-217.
6. West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, Munoz B. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:774-780.
7. Szlyk JP, Seiple W, Fishman GA, et al. Perceived and actual performance of daily tasks: relationship to visual function tests in individuals with retinitis pigmentosa. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(1):65-75.
8. Szlyk JP, Fishman GA, Alexander KR, et al. Relationship between difficulty in performing daily activities and clinical measures of visual function in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115(1):53-59.
9. Berla ED, Rankin EF, Willis DH. Psychometric evaluation of the low vision diagnostic assessment procedure. J Vis Impair Blind. 1980;74:297-301.
10. Alexander MF, Maguire MG, Lietman TM, et al. Assessment of visual function in patients with ARMD and low visual acuity. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988;106:1543-1547.
11. Ross CK, Stelmack JA, Stelmack TR, Fraim M. Preliminary examination of the reliability and relation to clinical state of a measure of low vision patient functional status. Optom Vis Sci. 1991;68:918-923.
12. Yamazaki Y, Yoshikawa K, Kunimatsu S, et al. Influence of myopic disc shape on the diagnostic precision of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 1999;43(5):392-397.
13. Worrall L, Hickson L, Barnett H, Lovie-Kitchin J. The performance of older people on everyday visual tasks. Clin Exp Optom. 1993;76:127-135.
14. Spaeth G, Tamhankar M, Bitterman A, et al. The Task Performance Test (TPT) - A visual function scale. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41(4s):470.
15. Spaeth GL, Henderer J, Liu C, et al. The disc damage likelihood scale: reproducibility of a new method of estimating the amount of optic nerve damage caused by glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2002;100:181-185: discussion 5-6.
16. Hodapp E, Parrish II R, Anderson D. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, Inc., 1993.
17. Elliott DB, Bullimore MA, Bailey IL. Improving the reliability of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart. Clin Vision Sci. 1991;6:471-475.
18. Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkins AJ. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vision Sci. 1988;2:187-199.
19. Nelson P, Aspinall P, O'Brien C. Patients' perception of visual impairment in glaucoma: a pilot study. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:546-552.
20. Mangione CM, Lee PP, Pitts J, et al. Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ). Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:1496-1504.
21. Mangione CM, Lee P, Gutierrez PR, et al. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:1050-1058.
22. Valbuena M, Bandeen-Roche K, Rubin GS, et al. Self-reported assessment of visual function in a population-based study: the SEE project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40(2):280-288.
23. Whittaker SG, Lovie-Kitchin J. Visual requirements for reading. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70(1):54-65.
24. Marron JA, Bailey IL. Visual factors and orientation-mobility performance. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1982;59(5):413-426.
25. Haymes SA, Johnston AW, Heyes AD. A weighted version of the Melbourne Low-Vision ADL Index: a measure of disability impact. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78(8):565-579.
26. Brown B, Brabyn L, Welch L, et al. Contribution of vision variables to mobility in age-related maculopathy patients. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1986;63(9):733-739.
27. Turano KA, Rubin GS, Quigley HA. Mobility performance in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40(12):2803-2809.
28. Rubin GS, Munoz B, Bandeen-Roche K, West SK. Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41(11):3327-3334.
29. Szlyk JP, Fishman GA, Grover S, et al. Difficulty in performing everyday activities in patients with juvenile macular dystrophies: comparison with patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82(12):1372-1376.
30. Parrish RK II. Visual impairment, visual functioning, and quality of life assessments in patients with glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1996;94:919-1028.
31. Parrish RK II, Gedde SJ, Scott IU, et al. Visual function and quality of life among patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115(11):1447-1455.
32. Bond TG, Fox, C. M. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences, 1st ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 2001.
33. Winsteps. Winsteps Software. www.winsteps.com, 2004.
34. McHorney CA, Cohen AS. Equating health status measures with item response theory: illustrations with functional status items. Med Care. 2000;38(9 Suppl):II43-59.
35. Linacre JM. Detecting multidimensionality: which residual data-type works best? J Outcome Meas. 1998;2(3):266-283.
36. Ross JE, Bron AJ, Clarke DD. Contrast sensitivity and visual disability in chronic simple glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1984;68:821-827.
37. Owsley C, Sloane ME. Contrast sensitivity, acuity, and the perception of 'real-world' targets. Br J Ophthalmol. 1987;71(10):791-796.
38. Lester M, Zingirian M. Quality of life in patients with early, moderate and advanced glaucoma. Eye. 2002;16:44-49.
39. Viswanathan AC, McNaught AI, Poinoosawmy D. Severity and stability of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:450-454.
40. Broman AT, Munoz B, Rodriguez J, et al. The impact of visual impairment and eye disease on vision-related quality of life in a Mexican-American population: proyecto VER. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43(11):3393-3398.
41. Odberg T, Jacobsen JE, Hultgren SJ, Halseide R. The impact of glaucoma on the quality of life of patients in Norway. 1. Results from a self-administered questionnaire. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2001;79:116-120.
42. Valderas JM, Alonso J, Prieto L, et al. Content-based interpretation aids for health-related quality of life measures in clinical practice. An example for the visual function index (VF-14). Qual Life Res. 2004;13(1):35-44.