ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2020
Both sub-scales of the "Keratoconus End-Points Assessment Questionnaire" (KEPAQ) are unidimensional and reliable.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2020. 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.
- Functional and Emotional Impact of Dry Eye and Meibomian Gland Dysfunction in Keratoconus.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Quality of life and tomography indices in patients with keratoconus.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
- Standardizing the measurement and classification of quality of life using the Keratoconus End-Points Assessment Questionnaire (KEPAQ): the ABCDEF keratoconus classification.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2022Article
- Both subscales of the Keratoconus End-Points Assessment Questionnaire have excellent test-retest reliability.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeasuring quality of life in keratoconus is important and demands for well-constructed instruments and scales. To date, the Keratoconus End-Points Assessment Questionnaire (KEPAQ) is the only disease-specific scale to measure both functional and emotional compromise due to disease. Nevertheless, not much information exists regarding whether both sub-scales of the test show unidimensionality, a necessary condition in well-functioning instruments.
methodsA sample of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of keratoconus were administered the full version of the KEPAQ. A Rasch analysis and principal component analysis were performed.
resultsA total of 249 patients with keratoconus were included. Their average age was 29.19 ± 10.91 years, and 51.40% were male. Mean score for the KEPAQ-E was 2.51 ± 3.29 logit while it was 2.26 ± 3.70 logit for the KEPAQ-F. For both sub-scales, Kaiser Criterion, Scree Plot Criterion, and Variability Criterion demonstrated unidimensionality. Reliability as measured by Cronbach's alpha was 0.85 for the KEPAQ-E and 0.87 for the KEPAQ-F.
conclusionsThe KEPAQ is a robust, well-designed disease-specific questionnaire that shows unidimensionality. It can be reliably used to measure quality of life in keratoconus patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32556639What 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.