ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2022
Optimizing Computer Adaptive Test Performance: A Hybrid Simulation Study to Customize the Administration Rules of the CAT-EyeQ in Macular Edema Patients.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspectives of Patients and Professionals on Implementing a Computer Adaptive Vision-Related Quality of Life Outcome (CAT-EyeQ) in Clinical Practice.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Efficiency, Precision, Validity, and Reliability of GlauCAT-Asian Computerized Adaptive Tests in Measuring Glaucoma-Related Quality of Life.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: In previous research the EyeQ item bank, which measures vision-related quality of life (Vr-QoL), was calibrated for future use as a computer adaptive test (CAT). The aim of the current study was to define optimal administration rules. Methods: CAT simulations were performed using real responses. Patients (N = 704; mean age, 76.2 years), having macular edema completed the EyeQ. Four CAT simulations were performed, which were set with different administration rules regarding length, accuracy level and the association with best health, which means the test was aborted after the first 4 responses of having no complaints. Results: The CATDefault showed a mean test length of 6.9 and 15.1% unreliable estimations. Extending the test length to 15 items (CATAlt1) resulted in a mean test length of 7.3 and slightly decreased the percentage unreliable estimations (11.5%). Under CATAlt2, the percentage unreliable estimations was 15.1% and the mean test length was 9.7. Percentages of floor/ceiling effects for CATDefault, CATAlt1, and CATAlt2 were 3.1, 3.0, and 3.1, respectively. CATBestHealth reduced the mean test length to 5.9 and showed 18.2% unreliably estimated patients, of which 14.2% had floor/ceiling scores. Conclusions: This study shows that the CATBestHealth provided reliably estimated ability scores, with a negligible increase in the number of unreliably estimated patients and ensures that patients having little or no vision-related quality of life problems are minimally burdened with completing items. Translational Relevance: The computer adaptive test EyeQ, set with optimal administration rules, can now be used for the computer adaptive assessment of vision-related quality of life in patients suffering from exudative retinal diseases in ophthalmic clinical practice.
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.