Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12236802›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics2002

Vision-specific instruments for the assessment of health-related quality of life and visual functioning: a literature review.

Mary Kay Margolis, Karin Coyne, Tessa Kennedy-Martin, Timothy Baker, Oliver Schein, Dennis A Revicki

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 163 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2009
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mary Kay MargolisMEDTAP International, Inc., Bethesda, Maryland 20814, USA. margolis@medtap.com
Karin Coyne
Tessa Kennedy-Martin
Timothy Baker
Oliver Schein
Dennis A Revicki
Johns Hopkins Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinically objective measures such as visual acuity or visual field provide an assessment of a patient's visual status. However such measures may not reflect the degree of visual impairment the patient experiences in his or her daily activities. Visual impairment has been shown to have negative effects on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and a significant impact on daily functioning, including social activities. As such, there is a growing recognition of the importance of patient-reported outcomes of visual functioning. This review examines the development and psychometric properties of 22 vision-specific instruments assessing visual functioning and/or the impact of visual impairment on HR-QOL or daily activities. Issues relevant to assessing vision-specific subjective outcomes are reviewed, with specific application of the reviewed instruments. Three instruments, the Activities of Daily Vision Scale, National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire, and Visual Function Index have been well validated and widely used, but others also show promise. To fully capture the benefits of a new ophthalmology treatment (or new treatment for eye disease) a valid and reliable visual instrument, in which the psychometric performance has been demonstrated in the particular ocular condition being treated, should be utilised.

Indexed as

PsychometricsHumansQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsVision, OcularVision Tests

Identifiers

PMID12236802
OpenAlexW2000333599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.