TY - JOUR
T1 - Visual function assessment questionnaires
AU - Massof, Robert W.
AU - Rubin, Gary S.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by a grant from the Multiple District 22 Lions Vision Research Foundation and by Grants EY12045 from the National Eye Institute and AG16294 from the National Institute of Aging, National Institutes of Health. The authors have no proprietary interest in any product mentioned or procedure discussed in this article. Edie Stern edited the manuscript.
PY - 2001
Y1 - 2001
N2 - With increased emphasis on functional outcomes in ophthalmology, third-party health care payers and research funding agencies have turned their attention to the development and use of visual function questionnaires. Since 1980, more than a dozen such self-report visual function questionnaires have been developed. All of these instruments include items that ask about specific daily activities; patients must respond with a rating that represents the level of difficulty that they experience with the activity described. This article reviews all of the known instruments, with special attention paid to their validity and reliability. Most validation studies have reported high response consistency across items and significant correlations of instrument scores with visual impairment measures. Only two studies have measured test-retest reliability. The developers of visual function questionnaires typically divide the items into several different subscales, suggesting that different variables are being measured. Although the items are very similar for the different instruments, there is little agreement among instruments on the definition of subscales. All instruments are scored as the average of the ordinal patient ratings across items for each subscale and/or for the total instrument. Measurement issues underlying the scoring of ordinal patient ratings are discussed. It is argued that unless the instruments can be converted to interval scales, the averaging of patient ratings does not yield true measurements. The three visual function questionnaires that were calibrated with a statistical item response model, which estimates interval scales, are reviewed. It is concluded that future research and development should devote additional attention to the measurement properties of functional assessment instruments.
AB - With increased emphasis on functional outcomes in ophthalmology, third-party health care payers and research funding agencies have turned their attention to the development and use of visual function questionnaires. Since 1980, more than a dozen such self-report visual function questionnaires have been developed. All of these instruments include items that ask about specific daily activities; patients must respond with a rating that represents the level of difficulty that they experience with the activity described. This article reviews all of the known instruments, with special attention paid to their validity and reliability. Most validation studies have reported high response consistency across items and significant correlations of instrument scores with visual impairment measures. Only two studies have measured test-retest reliability. The developers of visual function questionnaires typically divide the items into several different subscales, suggesting that different variables are being measured. Although the items are very similar for the different instruments, there is little agreement among instruments on the definition of subscales. All instruments are scored as the average of the ordinal patient ratings across items for each subscale and/or for the total instrument. Measurement issues underlying the scoring of ordinal patient ratings are discussed. It is argued that unless the instruments can be converted to interval scales, the averaging of patient ratings does not yield true measurements. The three visual function questionnaires that were calibrated with a statistical item response model, which estimates interval scales, are reviewed. It is concluded that future research and development should devote additional attention to the measurement properties of functional assessment instruments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035350303&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035350303&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0039-6257(01)00194-1
DO - 10.1016/S0039-6257(01)00194-1
M3 - Article
C2 - 11425359
AN - SCOPUS:0035350303
SN - 0039-6257
VL - 45
SP - 531
EP - 548
JO - Survey of ophthalmology
JF - Survey of ophthalmology
IS - 6
ER -