Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24435696›Full record

ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2014

Development of a preference-based index from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25.

Anne M Rentz, Jonathan W Kowalski, John G Walt, Ron D Hays, John E Brazier, Ren Yu, Paul Lee, Neil Bressler, Dennis A Revicki

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. 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 · 2020
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. 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 · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Health state utilities associated with X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP).The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

9 authors.

Anne M RentzEvidera, Bethesda, Maryland.
Jonathan W KowalskiAllergan Inc, Irvine, California.
John G WaltAllergan Inc, Irvine, California.
Ron D HaysDepartment of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles.
John E BrazierSchool of Health and Related Research, Sheffield University, Sheffield, England.
Ren YuEvidera, Bethesda, Maryland.
Paul LeeDuke University, Durham, North Carolina6now with Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Neil BresslerRetina Division, Wilmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Dennis A RevickiEvidera, Bethesda, Maryland.

Funding

The Center for Health Improvement of Minority ElderlyP30AG021684 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Homero Erwin del Pino · 2002 to 2026
$19.7M
TRAINING COREP20MD000182 · NIMHD · CHARLES R. DREW UNIVERSITY OF MED &SCI · PI MILBURN, NORWEETA GERMAINE, SHAPIRO, MARTIN F. · 2002 to 2016
$16.5M
UCLA OLDER AMERICANS INDEPENDENCE CENTERP30AG028748 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI IRWIN, MICHAEL R · 2006 to 2017
$9.8M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG021684NIA NIH HHS P30AG021684NIA NIH HHS P30 AG028748NIA NIH HHS P30AG028748NIMHD NIH HHS 2P20MD000182NIMHD NIH HHS P20 MD000182
6 · The paper itself

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

Health StatusNational Eye Institute (U.S.)Quality of LifeSickness Impact ProfileSurveys and QuestionnairesAdultAlgorithmsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsUnited StatesVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID24435696
PMCPMC4357476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.