Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33546603›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2021

Psychometric validation techniques applied to the IND-VFQ-33 visual function questionnaire: the Hyderabad ocular morbidity in the elderly study (HOMES).

William Mitchell, Srinivas Marmamula, Nazlee Zebardast, Weiwen Ng, Joseph J Locascio, Thirupathi Kumbam, Satya Brahmanandam, Navya Rekha Barrenkala

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

William MitchellMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, USA. william.greig.mitchell@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2122-6741
Srinivas MarmamulaAllen Foster Community Eye Health Research Centre, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Nazlee ZebardastMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Department of Ophthalmology, Boston, USA.
Weiwen NgUniversity of Minnesota School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA.
Joseph J LocascioDepartment of Neurology, MA General Hospital, Boston, USA.
Thirupathi KumbamAllen Foster Community Eye Health Research Centre, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Satya BrahmanandamAllen Foster Community Eye Health Research Centre, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Navya Rekha BarrenkalaAllen Foster Community Eye Health Research Centre, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
L V Prasad Eye Institute · INMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/CPHE/14/1/501506
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver 2 billion people suffer from vision impairment or blindness globally, and access to validated visual measurement tools in imperative in accurately describing and managing the burden of eye disease. The present study applies contemporary psychometric validation techniques to the widely used 33-item Indian Visual Function Questionnaire (IND-VFQ-33).

methodsWe first estimated the polychoric correlation between each pair of items. Next, an unrotated and oblique Promax rotated factor analysis, item response theory (IRT, using a graded response model (GRM)), and differential item functioning (DIF) testing were applied to the IND-VFQ-33. We subsequently propose a validated IND-VFQ-33 questionnaire after psychometric testing, data reduction, and adjustment.

resultsExploratory unrotated factor analysis identified two factors; one with a particularly high eigenvalue (18.1) and a second with a lower eigenvalue still above our threshold (1.1). A subsequent oblique Promax factor rotation was undertaken for a 2-factor solution, revealing two moderately correlated factors (+ 0.68) with clinically discrete item loadings onto either Factor 1 (21 items; collectively labelled "daily activities") or Factor 2 (5 items; collectively labelled "bright lights"). IRT confirmed high item discrimination for all remaining items with good separation between difficulty thresholds. We found significant DIF on depression for six items in Factor 1 (all uniform DIF, except item 21 (non-uniform DIF) with no substantive difference in beta thresholds for any item and no substantive difference in expected individual or sum score, by depression at baseline. For Factor 2, only one item demonstrated significant uniform DIF on gender, similarly without major differences in beta thresholds or expected total score between gender at baseline. Consequently, no further item recalibration or reduction was undertaken after IRT and DIF analysis.

conclusionApplying IRT and DIF validation techniques to the IND-VFQ-33 identified 2 discrete factors with 26 uniquely-loading items, clinically representative of difficulty performing daily activities and experiencing difficulty due to bright lights/glare respectively. The proposed modified scale may be useful in evaluating symptomatic disease progression or response to treatment in an Indian population.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeVision, OcularAgedHumansMorbidityPsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesDifferential item functioningFactor analysisItem response theoryOphthalmologyPsychometric validation

Identifiers

PMID33546603
PMCPMC7866746
OpenAlexW3128319025

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.