ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2014
Development of a preference-based index from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25.
Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments Relevant to Glaucoma.Journal of glaucoma · 2026Pooled it
- Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept versus bevacizumab for macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion: the LEAVO non-inferiority three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Trial
- Mapping From Visual Acuity to EQ-5D, EQ-5D With Vision Bolt-On, and VFQ-UI in Patients With Macular Edema in the LEAVO Trial.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020Trial
- Longitudinal Vision-Related Quality of Life for Patients with Noninfectious Uveitis Treated with Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant or Systemic Corticosteroid Therapy.Ophthalmology · 2017Trial
- Do we agree on health state outcomes? A review of measurement agreement between time-trade off and other utility measures.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Content Validity of Two Generic Preference-Based Measures in Retinitis Pigmentosa, Including X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Health state utilities associated with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP).The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- A scoping review to create a framework for the steps in developing condition-specific preference-based instruments de novo or from an existing non-preference-based instrument: use of item response theory or Rasch analysis.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- Utility index and vision-related quality of life in patients awaiting specialist eye care.PloS one · 2024Article
- Psychometric properties and comparison of four health utility approaches among myopia patients in China.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- Elicitation of Health State Utility Values in Retinitis Pigmentosa by Time Trade-off in the United Kingdom.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2023Article
- Challenges of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Novel Therapeutics for Inherited Retinal Diseases.American journal of ophthalmology · 2022Review
- Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life in Individuals with Inherited Retinal Diseases.Ophthalmology science · 2022Article
- The Utility of Economic Measures to Quantify the Burden of Tinnitus in Affected Individuals: A Scoping Review.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2022Article
- Exploring Vision-Related Quality of Life: A Qualitative Study Comparing Patients' Experience of Cataract Surgery with a Standard Monofocal IOL and an Enhanced Monofocal IOL.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- 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.Acta ophthalmologica · 2021Article
- Utility Index and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Glaucomatous Patients Comparing with Normal Participants.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Voretigene Neparvovec for Treating Inherited Retinal Dystrophies Caused by RPE65 Gene Mutations: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Highly Specialised Technology Appraisal.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Review
- Outcomes important to patients with non-infectious posterior segment-involving uveitis: a qualitative study.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceUnderstanding how individuals value health states is central to patient-centered care and to health policy decision making. Generic preference-based measures of health may not effectively capture the impact of ocular diseases. Recently, 6 items from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 were used to develop the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification, which defines visual function health states.
objectiveTo describe elicitation of preferences for health states generated from the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification and development of an algorithm to estimate health preference scores for any health state. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsNonintervention, cross-sectional study of the general community in 4 countries (Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, and United States). A total of 607 adult participants were recruited from local newspaper advertisements. In the United Kingdom, an existing database of participants from previous studies was used for recruitment.
interventionsEight of 15,625 possible health states from the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index were valued using time trade-off technique. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A θ severity score was calculated for Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index-defined health states using item response theory analysis. Regression models were then used to develop an algorithm to assign health state preference values for all potential health states defined by the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index.
resultsHealth state preference values for the 8 states ranged from a mean (SD) of 0.343 (0.395) to 0.956 (0.124). As expected, preference values declined with worsening visual function. Results indicate that the Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index describes states that participants view as spanning most of the continuum from full health to dead. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index health state classification produces health preference scores that can be estimated in vision-related studies that include the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25. These preference scores may be of value for estimating utilities in economic and health policy analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.