7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Validation and comparison of the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire‐25 (NEI VFQ‐25) and the Visual Function Index‐14 (VF‐14) in patients with cataracts: a multicentre study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          The present study aimed to investigate and compare the psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire‐25 (NEI VFQ‐25) and the Visual Function Index‐14 (VF‐14) in a large sample of patients with cataracts.

          Methods

          A total of 1052 patients with bilateral age‐related cataracts were recruited in the study. Patients with other comorbidities that severely impacted vision were excluded. Participants completed the two questionnaires in random order. Classical test theory and Rasch analyses were used to assess the psychometric properties of the questionnaires.

          Results

          Complete data were obtained from 899 patients. The mean overall index score on the NEI VFQ‐25 was 76.1 ± 19.0, while that on the VF‐14 was 46.5 ± 15.0. Cronbach's α‐values for the NEI VFQ‐25 and VF‐14 were 0.89 and 0.95, respectively. Ceiling effects were observed on nine of the 12 subscales in the NEI VFQ‐25. The correlation between total scores on the NEI VFQ‐25 and VF‐14 was moderate ( r = 0.600; p < 0.001), and subscales of the NEI VFQ‐25 were weakly or moderately correlated with the similar domains on the VF‐14. Rasch analysis revealed ordered category thresholds and sufficient person separation for both instruments, while the two questionnaires had critical deficiencies in unidimensionality, targeting and differential item functioning.

          Conclusion

          Neither the NEI VFQ‐25 nor VF‐14 is optimal for the assessment of vision‐related quality of life in typical Chinese patients with cataracts. The potential deficiencies of the questionnaires should be taken into consideration prior to application of the instruments or interpretation of the results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.

          Recently, an increasing number of systematic reviews have been published in which the measurement properties of health status questionnaires are compared. For a meaningful comparison, quality criteria for measurement properties are needed. Our aim was to develop quality criteria for design, methods, and outcomes of studies on the development and evaluation of health status questionnaires. Quality criteria for content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, construct validity, reproducibility, longitudinal validity, responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects, and interpretability were derived from existing guidelines and consensus within our research group. For each measurement property a criterion was defined for a positive, negative, or indeterminate rating, depending on the design, methods, and outcomes of the validation study. Our criteria make a substantial contribution toward defining explicit quality criteria for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Our criteria can be used in systematic reviews of health status questionnaires, to detect shortcomings and gaps in knowledge of measurement properties, and to design validation studies. The future challenge will be to refine and complete the criteria and to reach broad consensus, especially on quality criteria for good measurement properties.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Lens Opacities Classification System III. The Longitudinal Study of Cataract Study Group.

            To develop the Lens Opacities Classification System III (LOCS III) to overcome the limitations inherent in lens classification using LOCS II. These limitations include unequal intervals between standards, only one standard for color grading, use of integer grading, and wide 95% tolerance limits. The LOCS III contains an expanded set of standards that were selected from the Longitudinal Study of Cataract slide library at the Center for Clinical Cataract Research, Boston, Mass. It consists of six slit-lamp images for grading nuclear color (NC) and nuclear opalescence (NO), five retroillumination images for grading cortical cataract (C), and five retroillumination images for grading posterior subcapsular (P) cataract. Cataract severity is graded on a decimal scale, and the standards have regularly spaced intervals on a decimal scale. The 95% tolerance limits are reduced from 2.0 for each class with LOCS II to 0.7 for nuclear opalescence, 0.7 for nuclear color, 0.5 for cortical cataract, and 1.0 for posterior subcapsular cataract with the LOCS III, with excellent interobserver agreement. The LOCS III is an improved LOCS system for grading slit-lamp and retroillumination images of age-related cataract.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A rating formulation for ordered response categories

              Psychometrika, 43(4), 561-573
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jiang186168@163.com
                ykyyczm@126.com
                13911254862@163.com
                Journal
                Acta Ophthalmol
                Acta Ophthalmol
                10.1111/(ISSN)1755-3768
                AOS
                Acta Ophthalmologica
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1755-375X
                1755-3768
                17 September 2020
                June 2021
                : 99
                : 4 ( doiID: 10.1111/aos.v99.4 )
                : e480-e488
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Peking University Third Hospital Beijing China
                [ 2 ] Beijing Fengtai Hospital Beijing China
                [ 3 ] Hebei Eye Hospital Xingtai China
                [ 4 ] General Hospital of Huabei Petroleum Administration Bureau Renqiu China
                [ 5 ] The Hospital of Shunyi District Beijing China
                [ 6 ] Datong Aier Eye Hospital Datong China
                [ 7 ] People's Hospital of YongQing Langfang China
                [ 8 ] Baoding Zhuozhou Gem Flower Hospital Zhuozhou China
                [ 9 ] Baoding Gem Flower Dongfang Hospital Xushui China
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence:

                Aimin Jiang

                The Hospital of Shunyi District

                No. 3 Guangming South Street

                Shunyi District, Beijing

                China

                Tel: +86 15811186168

                Email: jiang186168@ 123456163.com

                Zhimin Chen

                Hebei Eye Hospital

                399 Quanbei East Street

                Xingtai City, Hebei Province

                China

                Tel: +86 18932978678

                Fax: +Xxxxx

                Email: ykyyczm@ 123456126.com

                Xuemin Li

                Department of Ophthalmology

                Peking University Third Hospital

                49 North Garden Road

                Haidian District, Beijing

                China

                Tel: +86 13911254862

                Fax: +8601082089951

                Email: 13911254862@ 123456163.com

                [ † ]

                These authors contributed equally to the work.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0416-9378
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4018-9974
                Article
                AOS14606
                10.1111/aos.14606
                8359188
                32940410
                b440ddcb-064a-40d2-94d4-debc063b8dd0
                © 2020 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 13 July 2020
                : 15 March 2020
                : 06 August 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 5, Pages: 5, Words: 8624
                Funding
                Funded by: National Science and Technology Major Project
                Award ID: 2018ZX10101004
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                June 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.5 mode:remove_FC converted:12.08.2021

                Ophthalmology & Optometry
                cataract,nei vfq‐25,psychometric properties,rasch analysis,vf‐14,vision‐related quality of life

                Comments

                Comment on this article