Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33439361›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2021

Vision-related quality of life in adults with severe peripheral vision loss: a qualitative interview study.

Ryan Lange, Abigail Kumagai, Sara Weiss, Katherine B Zaffke, Sherry Day, Donna Wicker, Ashley Howson, K Thiran Jayasundera, Lori Smolinski, Christina Hedlich and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

15 authors.

Ryan LangeDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Abigail KumagaiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Sara WeissDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Katherine B ZaffkeDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Sherry DayDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Donna WickerDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Ashley HowsonDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
K Thiran JayasunderaDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Lori SmolinskiAssociation for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Grand Rapids, MI, USA.
Christina HedlichAssociation for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Grand Rapids, MI, USA.
Paul P LeeDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Robert W MassofDepartment of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Joan A StelmackEdward Hines, Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL, USA.
Noelle E CarlozziInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Joshua R EhrlichDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. joshre@med.umich.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0607-3564

Funding

Targeted functional testing for retinal diseases based on patient reported outcomesK23EY026985 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI JAYASUNDERA, KANISHKA THIRAN · 2016 to 2020
$1.2M
Addressing Low Vision due to Severe Peripheral Field Loss: Development and Validation of a Patient-Centered Outcome MeasureK23EY027848 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI EHRLICH, JOSHUA ROBERT · 2017 to 2021
$1.2M
NEI NIH HHS K23 EY026985NEI NIH HHS K23 EY027848NEI NIH HHS K23EY027848
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures may not be relevant to the full range of functional and vision-related quality of life (VR-QOL) concerns of individuals with vision impairment due to severe peripheral field loss (PFL). Measurement of VR-QOL in severe PFL is important in order to determine the effectiveness of vision rehabilitation interventions for this population. The purpose of this study was to characterize the impact of severe PFL due to retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and glaucoma on VR-QOL as the initial phase in the development of a novel PRO measure.

methodsIndividuals with severe PFL due to RP or glaucoma were recruited from the Kellogg Eye Center and the Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired. Participants completed semi-structured qualitative interviews, the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire and the RAND 36-Item Health Survey. Interviews were analyzed by two coders using thematic analysis. A matrix analysis was conducted to compare VR-QOL by cause of severe PFL. Sample size was determined by thematic saturation.

resultsThe study included 37 participants (19 RP, 18 glaucoma). Median best-corrected visual acuity for those with RP and glaucoma was 20/40 and 20/27.5, while Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity was 1.2 log contrast sensitivity (logCS) and 1.1 logCS, respectively. Median domain scores on the IVI (reading, mobility, well-being) ranged from a low of - 0.2 to a high of 0.7 logits in those with RP and from 0.5 to 1.2 logits in those with glaucoma. Qualitative interviews identified six VR-QOL themes relevant across participants with both RP and glaucoma, including activity limitations, driving, emotional well-being, reading, mobility, and social function. VR-QOL concerns were largely consistent among those with severe PFL due to RP and glaucoma. These overarching themes contained content relevant to specific challenges related to severe PFL.

conclusionsThere are commonly occurring VR-QOL concerns among individuals with severe PFL due to RP and glaucoma. The outlined themes will serve as the basis for development of the Low Vision Severely Constricted Peripheral Eyesight (LV-SCOPE) Questionnaire.

Indexed as

GlaucomaInterviewLow visionPatient-reported outcomePeripheral field lossPeripheral visionQualitative researchRetinitis pigmentosaVision rehabilitationVision-related quality of life

Identifiers

PMID33439361
PMCPMC7806695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.