Visual functioning questionnaire: Reevaluation of psychometric properties for a group of working-age adults

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 84, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 775-784

  Langelaan, Maaike ^a,b,c,f   Van Nispen, Ruth M A ^a,b   Knol, Dirk L ^a   Moll, Annette C ^a,b   De Boer, Michiel R ^d   Wouters, Bill ^c   Van Rens, Ger H M B ^a,b,e  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Het Loo Erf   (Netherlands)

^d VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^e ELKERLIEK HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^f NONE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Exploratory factor analysis; Low vision; Quality of Life; Rasch analysis; Rehabilitation; VFQ 25; Working age adults

Indexed keywords

PATIENT REHABILITATION; PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL;

DIFFERENTIAL ITEM FUNCTIONING; EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS; LOW VISION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RASCH ANALYSIS; WORKING AGE ADULTS;

VISION;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE DISCOMFORT; EYE PAIN; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RASCH ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VISION; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

ACCOMMODATION, OCULAR; ADULT; AGED; ASTHENOPIA; DEPENDENCY (PSYCHOLOGY); FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MOVEMENT; PAIN; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; VISION, LOW; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 34547884628     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181334b98     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Aaronson NK. Quality of life: what is it? How should it be measured? Oncology (Williston Park) 1988;2:69-76, 64.
2. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-15.
3. Stelmack J. Quality of life of low-vision patients and outcomes of low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci 2001;78:335-42.
4. Massof RW, Hsu CT, Baker FH, Barnett GD, Park WL, Deremeik JT, Rainey C, Epstein C. Visual disability variables. I. The importance and difficulty of activity goals for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:946-53.
5. Massof RW, Hsu CT, Baker FH, Barnett GD, Park WL, Deremeik JT, Rainey C, Epstein C. Visual disability variables. II. The difficulty of tasks for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:954-67.
6. van Rens GH, Arkell SM. Refractive errors and axial length among Alaskan Eskimos. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1991;69:27-32.
7. Leat SJ, Fryer A, Rumney NJ. Outcome of low vision aid provision: the effectiveness of a low vision clinic. Optom Vis Sci 1994;71:199-206.
8. Harper R, Doorduyn K, Reeves B, Slater L. Evaluating the outcomes of low vision rehabilitation. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1999;19:3-11.
9. Hinds A, Sinclair A, Park J, Suttie A, Paterson H, Macdonald M. Impact of an interdisciplinary low vision service on the quality of life of low vision patients. Br J Ophthalmol 2003;87:1391-6.
10. Raasch TW, Leat SJ, Kleinstein RN, Bullimore MA, Cutter GR. Evaluating the value of low-vision services. J Am Optom Assoc 1997;68:287-95.
11. Stelmack JA, Szlyk JP, Stelmack TR, Demers-Turco P, Williams RT, Moran D, Massof RW. Measuring outcomes of vision rehabilitation with the Veterans Affairs Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:3253-61.
12. de Boer MR, Moll AC, de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Volker-Dieben HJ, van Rens GH. Psychometric properties of vision-related quality of life questionnaires: a systematic review. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2004;24:257-73.
13. Margolis MK, Coyne K, Kennedy-Martin T, Baker T, Schein O, Revicki DA. Vision-specific instruments for the assessment of health-related quality of life and visual functioning: a literature review. Pharmacoeconomics 2002;20:791-812.
14. Massof RW, Rubin GS. Visual function assessment questionnaires. Surv Ophthalmol 2001;45:531-48.
15. Bradley EA, Sloan JA, Novotny PJ, Garrity JA, Woog JJ, West SK. Evaluation of the National Eye Institute visual function questionnaire in Graves' ophthalmopathy. Ophthalmology 2006;113:1450-4.
16. Hyman LG, Komaroff E, Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Leske MC. Treatment and vision-related quality of life in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology 2005;112:1505-13.
17. Cahill MT, Stinnett SS, Banks AD, Freedman SF, Toth CA. Quality of life after macular translocation with 360 degrees peripheral retinectomy for age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 2005;112:144-51.
18. Stelmack JA, Stelmack TR, Massof RW. Measuring low-vision rehabilitation outcomes with the NEI VFQ-25. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:2859-68.
19. Suzukamo Y, Oshika T, Yuzawa M, Tokuda Y, Tomidokoro A, Oki K, Mangione CM, Green J, Fukuhara S. Psychometric properties of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25), Japanese version. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005;3:65.
20. Toprak AB, Eser E, Guler C, Baser FE, Mayali H. Cross-validation of the Turkish version of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ 25). Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2005;12:259-69.
21. Broman AT, Munoz B, West SK, Rodriguez J, Sanchez R, Snyder R, Klein R. Psychometric properties of the 25-item NEI-VFQ in a Hispanic population: Proyecto VER. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:606-13.
22. Magacho L, Lima FE, Nery AC, Sagawa A, Magacho B, Avila MP. Quality of life in glaucoma patients: regression analysis and correlation with possible modifiers. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2004;11:263-70.
23. Nordmann JP, Viala M, Sullivan K, Arnould B, Berdeaux G. Psychometric Validation of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI VFQ-25) French version: in a population of patients treated for ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Pharmacoeconomics 2004;22:197-206.
24. Massof RW, Fletcher DC. Evaluation of the NEI visual functioning questionnaire as an interval measure of visual ability in low vision. Vision Res 2001;41:397-413.
25. van der Sterre GW, van de Graaf ES, Verezen CA, Meulendijks CF, Schouten JS, Saxena R, Polling JR, van Rijn LJ, Essink-Bot ML, Simonsz HJ. National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25: Nederlandse Consensus Vertaling (VFQ-25/NL). Verse 2001. Available at: http://www2.eur.nl/fgg/mgz/mgzpapers/ interviewer%20versie%20%20VFQ25-NL%2020011107.pdf. Accessed November 2002.
26. Mangione CM, Berry S, Spritzer K, Janz NK, Klein R, Owsley C, Lee PP. Identifying the content area for the 51-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire: results from focus groups with visually impaired persons. Arch Ophthalmol 1998;116:227-33.
27. Mangione CM, Lee PP, Gutierrez PR, Spritzer K, Berry S, Hays RD. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119:1050-8.
28. Fuhr PS, Holmes L, Fletcher DC, Swanson MN, Kuyk TK. The AMA Guides functional vision score is a better predictor of vision-targeted quality of life than traditional measures of visual acuity or visual field extent. Visual Impair Res 2003;5:137-46.
29. Cocchiarella L, Turk MA, Andersson G. Improving the evaluation of permanent impairment. JAMA 2000;283:532-3.
30. Langelaan M, Wouters B, Moll AC, de Boer MR, van Rens GH. Functional field score: the effect of using a Goldmann V-4e isopter instead of a Goldmann III-4e isopter. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:1817-23.
31. SPSS. Version 13.0 [computer program]. Chicago: SPSS Inc.; 2004.
32. Floyd FJ, Widaman KF. Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assess 1995;7:286-99.
33. Flora DB, Curran PJ. An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychol Methods 2004;9:466-91.
34. Mplus User's Guide. Version 3.13 [computer program]. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen; 2005.
35. Wright BD, Mok M. Rasch models overview. J Appl Meas 2000;1:83-106.
36. Linacre JM. Investigating rating scale category utility. J Outcome Meas 1999;3:103-22.
37. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating Scale Analysis. Chicago: Mesa Press; 1982.
38. Prieto L, Alonso J, Lamarca R. Classical test theory versus Rasch analysis for quality of life questionnaire reduction. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003;1:27.
39. Smith EV Jr. Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation: a Rasch measurement perspective. J Appl Meas 2001;2:281-311.
40. Andrich D, Lyne A, Sheridan B, Luo G. RUMM 2020 [computer program]. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2003.
41. Kline P. A Handbook of Test Construction: Introduction to Psychometric Design. London: Methuen; 1986.
42. Globe D, Varma R, Azen SP, Paz S, Yu E, Preston-Martin S. Psychometric performance of the NEI VFQ-25 in visually normal Latinos: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:1470-8.
43. Streiner DL. Figuring out factors: the use and misuse of factor analysis. Can J Psychiatry 1994;39:135-40.
44. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB. The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) Questionnaire: development and validation. Optom Vis Sci 2004;81:769-77.
45. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Keeves JP, Elliott DB. The Activities of Daily Vision Scale for cataract surgery outcomes: re-evaluating validity with Rasch analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:2892-9.
46. Lamoureux EL, Pallant JF, Pesudovs K, Hassell JB, Keeffe JE. The Impact of Vision Impairment Questionnaire: an evaluation of its measurement properties using Rasch analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:4732-41.
47. Stelmack JA, Szlyk JP, Stelmack TR, Demers-Turco P, Williams RT, Moran D, Massof RW. Psychometric properties of the Veterans Affairs Low-Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:3919-28.
48. Turano KA, Geruschat DR, Stahl JW, Massof RW. Perceived visual ability for independent mobility in persons with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:865-77.
49. Velozo CA, Lai JS, Mallinson T, Hauselman E. Maintaining instrument quality while reducing items: application of Rasch analysis to a self-report of visual function. J Outcome Meas 2000;4:667-80.
50. Roznowski M, Dickter DN, Hong S, Sawin LL, Shute VJ. Validity of measures of cognitive processes and general ability for learning and performance on highly complex computerized tutors: is the g factor of intelligence even more general? J Appl Psychol 2000;85:940-55.