Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28573076›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2017

Optimizing the ULV-VFQ for Clinical Use Through Item Set Reduction: Psychometric Properties and Trade-Offs.

Gislin Dagnelie, Pamela E Jeter, Olukemi Adeyemo, PLoVR Study Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Low Vision Assessment in Virtual Reality (LVAVR): Spatial Computing in Virtual Reality and Real-World.2026 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. An update on retinal prostheses.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

4 authors.

Gislin DagnelieLions Vision Research & Rehabilitation Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Pamela E JeterLions Vision Research & Rehabilitation Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Olukemi AdeyemoLions Vision Research & Rehabilitation Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
PLoVR Study Group

Funding

Develop and Validate a Prosthetic Low Vision Rehabilitation (PLoVR) CurriculumR01EY021220 · NEI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DAGNELIE, GISLIN · 2011 to 2015
$2.4M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe examine the dimensionality of the 150-item visual functioning questionnaire for individuals with ultralow vision (ULV-VFQ) and develop representative abbreviated versions, facilitating clinical use, while retaining compatibility with a 17-item performance assessment.

methodsSubsets with 50 and 23 items covering the full difficulty range were selected, with evenly spaced item measures (IMs) and good representation of visual aspects and functional domains. Person measures (PMs) for the anchored subsets were derived through Rasch analysis of data from 80 respondents.

resultsFit statistics for the reduced item sets were similar to those for the full set, with reliabilities at or above 95%. Mean PMs in the reduced sets were within 0.8 standard errors (SEs) of those in the full set. SEs of the PMs increased from the SE for 150 items, roughly in inverse proportion with the square root of the set size. Unexplained variance levels (24%-27%) and variance of the first unexplained factor (3.3%-3.9%) were close to those (30% and 2.6%) for 150 items. Differential item functions for omitted items were negligible. Aspects and domains are adequately represented in the reduced sets.

conclusionsSelf-reported visual ability can be measured accurately using appropriately chosen anchored subsets of the ULV-VFQ. Functional ability of individuals with ULV is characterized adequately by a single dimension. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The ULV-VFQ50 and ULV-VFQ23, using anchored IMs from the 150-item ULV-VFQ, provide an efficient and reliable self-report assessment of visual ability in individuals whose visual impairment is too severe for assessment with VFQs currently in use.

Indexed as

low vision rehabilitationpatient-reported outcomesprosthetic visionultralow visionvisual functioning questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID28573076
PMCPMC5450924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.