The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) questionnaire: Development and validation

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 81, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 769-777

  Pesudovs, Konrad ^a   Garamendi, Estibaliz ^a   Elliott, David B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Quality of life; Questionnaire; Rasch analysis; Reliability and validity

Indexed keywords

DISEASES; LIGHT REFRACTION; OPHTHALMOLOGY; OPTICAL CORRELATION; STATISTICAL METHODS; SURGERY; VISION;

QUALITY OF LIFE (QOL); QUALITY OF LIFE IMPACT OF REFRACTIVE CORRECTION (QIRC); REFRACTIVE SURGERY; SPECTACLES;

CONTACT LENSES;

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTACT LENS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PILOT STUDY; PRESBYOPIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REFRACTION ERROR; REFRACTIVE SURGERY; RELIABILITY; SPECTACLES; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; CONTACT LENSES; EYEGLASSES; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PILOT PROJECTS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

EID: 5444271320     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00006324-200410000-00009     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Garratt A, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, Fitzpatrick R. Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 2002;324:1417.
2. Vision Watch. Vision Correction Market Review. New York: Jobson Publishing, 2003.
3. Hays RD, Mangione CM, Ellwein L, Lindblad AS, Spritzer KL, McDonnell PJ. Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute-Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument. Ophthalmology 2003;110:2292-301.
4. Schein OD. The measurement of patient-reported outcomes of refractive surgery: the refractive status and vision profile. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 2000;98:439-69.
5. Walline JJ, Bailey MD, Zadnik K. Vision-specific quality of life and modes of refractive error correction. Optom Vis Sci 2000;77: 648-52.
6. Nichols JJ, Mitchell GL, Zadnik K. The performance of the refractive status and vision profile survey in a contact lens clinical trial. Ophthalmology 2001;108:1160-6.
7. McDonnell PJ, Lee P, Spritzer K, Lindblad AS, Hays RD. Associations of presbyopia with vision-targeted health-related quality of life. Arch Ophthalmol 2003;121:1577-81.
8. McDonnell PJ, Mangione C, Lee P, Lindblad AS, Spritzer KL, Berry S, Hays RD. Responsiveness of the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument to surgical correction of refractive error. Ophthalmology 2003;110:2302-9.
9. Berry S, Mangione CM, Lindblad AS, McDonnell PJ. Development of the National Eye Institute refractive error correction quality of life questionnaire: focus groups. Ophthalmology 2003;110: 2285-91.
10. Nichols JJ, Mitchell GL, Saracino M, Zadnik K. Reliability and validity of refractive error-specific quality-of-life instruments. Arch Ophthalmol 2003;121:1289-96.
11. McGhee CN, Craig JP, Sachdev N, Weed KH, Brown AD. Functional, psychological, and satisfaction outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis for high myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000;26: 497-509.
12. Rose K, Harper R, Tromans C, Waterman C, Goldberg D, Haggerty C, Tullo A. Quality of life in myopia. Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84: 1031-4.
13. Hill JC. An informal satisfaction survey of 200 patients after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg 2002;18:454-9.
14. Day H, Jutai J. Measuring the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: the PIADS. Can J Rehab 1996;6:135-41.
15. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 1932;140:1-55.
16. Massof RW. The measurement of vision disability. Optom Vis Sci 2002;79:516-52.
17. 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.
18. Mangione CM, Phillips RS, Seddon JM, Lawrence MG, Cook EF, Dailey R, Goldman L. Development of the "Activities of Daily Vision Scale." A measure of visual functional status. Med Care 1992;30: 1111-26.
19. Raczek AE, Ware JE, Bjorner JB, Gandek B, Haley SM, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bech P, Brazier JE, Bullinger M, Sullivan M. Comparison of Rasch and summated rating scales constructed from SF-36 physical functioning items in seven countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:1203-14.
20. White LJ, Velozo CA. The use of Rasch measurement to improve the Oswestry classification scheme. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83: 822-31.
21. Norquist JM, Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J, Jenkinson C. Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Med Care 2004;42:I25-36.
22. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
23. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating Scale Analysis. Chicago: MESA Press, 1982.
24. Linacre JM. Investigating rating scale category utility. J Outcome Meas 1999;3:103-22.
25. Linacre JM. A User's Guide to Winsteps: Rasch-Model Computer Program. Chicago: Mesa Press, 2002.
26. Wright BD, Stone MH. Best Test Design. Chicago: MESA Press, 1979.
27. Fallowfield L. The Quality of Life: The Missing Measurement in Health Care. London: Souvenir Press, 1990.
28. Bowling A. What things are important in people's lives? A survey of the public's judgements to inform scales of health related quality of life. Soc Sci Med 1995;41:1447-62.
29. Felce D. Defining and applying the concept of quality of life. J Intellect Disabil Res 1997;41:126-35.
30. Seed P, Lloyd G. Quality of Life. London: Jessica Kingsley, 1997.
31. Oliver JPJ. Quality of Life and Mental Health Services. London: Routledge, 1996.
32. 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.
33. Massof RW, Rubin GS. Visual function assessment questionnaires. Surv Ophthalmol 2001;45:531-48.
34. Schein OD, Vitale S, Cassard SD, Steinberg EP. Patient outcomes of refractive surgery. The refractive status and vision profile. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:665-73.
35. Vitale S, Schein OD, Steinberg EP, Ware JE Jr. The refractive status and vision profile (RSVP): initial psychometric attributes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:5841.
36. Vitale S, Schein OD, Meinert CL, Steinberg EP. The refractive status and vision profile: a questionnaire to measure vision-related quality of life in persons with refractive error. Ophthalmology 2000;107:1529-39.
37. Demers L, Monette M, Lapierre Y, Arnold DL, Wolfson C. Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:21-30.
38. Day H, Jutai J, Campbell KA. Development of a scale to measure the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: lessons learned and the road ahead. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:31-7.
39. Fitzpatrick R, Jenkinson C, Klassen A, Goodacre T. Methods of assessing health-related quality of life and outcomes for plastic surgery. Br J Plast Surg 1999;52:251-5.
40. Alsarraf R. Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2000;24:192-7.
41. Nagata C, Ido M, Shimizu H, Misao A, Matsuura H. Choice of response scale for health measurement: comparison of 4, 5, and 7-point scales and visual analog scale. J Epidemiol 1996;6:192-7.
42. Skevington SM, Tucker C. Designing response scales for cross-cultural use in health care: data from the development of the UK WHOQOL. Br J Med Psychol 1999;72:51-61.
43. Office for National Statistics. National Statistics Online [National Statistics Web site]. 2001. Available at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/default. asp. Accessed February 16, 2001.
44. Smith RM. Person fit in the Rasch model. Educ Psychol Measurement 1986;46:359-72.
45. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420-8.
46. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1: 307-10.
47. The Market Research Society. Occupation Groupings. A Job Dictionary. London: The Market Research Society, 2003.
48. Pointer JS. An optometric population is not the same as the general population. Optometry Prac 2000;1:92-6.
49. DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.
50. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: validating scales and indexes. BMJ 2002;324:606-7.
51. Mintel Group. Optical Goods and Eyecare. London: Mintel Group, 2002.