ArticleHeliyon2024
Structural validity of the impact of vision impairment questionnaire among patients with visual impairment in Thailand.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire is used to assess vision-related quality of life (VRQOL) among patients with visual impairment. This study aims to evaluate the factor structure of the IVI in the context of Thai culture to assess psychometric properties. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted between February and July 2022. Purposive sampling was used to include 502 patients with visual impairment who received treatment at a tertiary eye center, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. The data were collected using the interviewer-administered questionnaire. The participants were randomly divided into two groups: one employed for exploratory factor analysis (EFA; n = 251) and the other for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; n = 251). Results: EFA yielded 28 items that supported a four-factor structure: behaviors related to mobility and independence (8 items), reading (3 items), self-dependence (7 items), and emotional impact of vision loss (10 items), with a total variance of 64.9 %. The model fit was good: χ2/df = 1.66, CFI = 0.949, TLI = 0.940, RMSEA = 0.052, and SRMR = 0.041. The AIC and BIC for the bifactor four-factor model (17,484.86 and 17,879.41, respectively) were lower than those for the bifactor three-factor model (17,566.44 and 17,961.29, respectively), indicating that the former showed the best fit. Conclusions: Given its good reliability and validity, the IVI scale has been extensively used to explore the impact of visual impairment on the VRQOL of patients in the clinical setting, thus greatly benefitting researchers, healthcare providers, and ophthalmologists.
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.