ArticleJournal of current ophthalmology2018
Psychometric properties of the Glaucoma Quality of Life-15 questionnaire: Use of explanatory factor analysis.
Article in Journal of current ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Xerostomia Inventory Questionnaire.Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2024Article
- Transcultural adaptation and validity of the nurse professional competence scale Korean version for graduating nursing students: An explanatory factor analysis.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Cross sectional study of depression, anxiety and quality of life in glaucoma patients at a tertiary centre in North Kerala.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Exploring the Association Between Resilience and Quality of Life Among Glaucoma Patients: Sleep Disturbance as a Mediating Factor.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purposes of this study were to validate the Persian translation of the Glaucoma Quality of Life-15 (GQL-15) questionnaire, evaluate its psychometric properties, and identify new composite items and item numbers.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted from August to November 2016, at the Glaucoma Clinic of the Ophthalmology Department at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran. One hundred ninety patients with glaucoma were enrolled. Habitual-corrected visual acuity (HCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), slit-lamp biomicroscopy, fundus exam, and mean deviation (MD) of the visual field were recorded in the course of clinical examination by glaucoma professional. Psychometric properties, i.e. test-retest reliability, internal consistency, content validity, and construct validity were evaluated with factor analysis. Based on the Disc Damage Likelihood Scale (DDLS), patients were stratified to mild, moderate, and severe disc damage. The association between the GQL-15 scores and disease severity (mild, moderate and severe) were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA).
resultsOf 190 eligible glaucoma patients, reliable clinical data were available for 140 participants. Mean age [standard deviation (SD)] of the patients was 58.7 (13.3) years. Cronbach's α coefficient ranged from 0.74 to 0.91, and the correlation coefficient for total score was 0.53. The content validity ratio (CVR) was 0.91 based on evaluations in expert panel. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) based on eigenvalue higher than one identified two factors after varimax rotation for the GQL-15 which explained 66.5% of the total variance. Discriminant validity analysis disclosed statistically significant differences in mean quality of life scores between levels of disease severity.
conclusionThe Persian version of the GQL-15 is a reliable and valid questionnaire for use in glaucoma clinics as a complementary tool for evidence-based decision-making.
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.