ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2023
Content Validity and Cognitive Debriefing of a Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument Evaluating Symptoms and Disease Impact in Patients with Geographic Atrophy.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- US Retina Specialists' Preferences for Geographic Atrophy Treatment.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Comorbid Depression and Anxiety Risk in Older Individuals with Geographic Atrophy: A US Claims Data Analysis.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- Impact of Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration on Daily Activities and Quality of Life: Interview Findings From Patients and Caregivers Relative to a General Population.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGeographic atrophy (GA) occurs in the later stages of dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and impairs visual acuity, eventually causing permanent blindness in some patients and impacting patient quality of life. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures that assess the experience of patients with visual impairment do not sufficiently capture all concepts salient to patients with GA. In this study the experience of patients with GA secondary to dry AMD was evaluated, and items from the novel 10-item Visual Impairment Symptom Severity Assessment (VISSA-10) PRO instrument were mapped to salient symptoms to assess its content validity, ease of use, and relevance.
methodsConcept elicitation interviews were conducted with patients with GA to determine salient symptoms and impacts of GA, and a conceptual model was developed to reflect these. The items in the VISSA-10 instrument were then mapped onto the salient symptoms included in this conceptual model. Cognitive debriefing interviews were also conducted with the same cohort to determine the comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the instrument, and to qualitatively assess levels of change considered meaningful by patients.
resultsIn total, 25 symptoms and 36 impacts were reported by 19 patients with GA, with seven symptoms and 11 impacts identified as salient. Of these, 12 symptoms and 15 impacts reported were not included in a previously published conceptual model for patients with dry AMD. Overall, eight of the ten items from the VISSA-10 instrument mapped to salient symptoms reported by patients with GA. All patients reported that the instrument was clear and easy to understand.
conclusionsThe VISSA-10 instrument was shown to be content valid, clear, and comprehensible, with sufficient concept coverage to measure the experience of patients with GA. Although further quantitative validation is required, this instrument has demonstrated potential for implementation in future clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of new treatments for GA.
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.