ArticlePloS one2024
The Screening Visual Complaints questionnaire-acquired brain injury: Development and evaluation of psychometric properties in a community sample.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeVisual complaints are a common consequence of acquired brain injury (ABI). Yet, they may be overlooked in clinical practice. The present study aims to develop a screening instrument for assessing visual complaints in individuals with ABI and evaluate its psychometrics properties in a community sample.
methodsWe constructed the Dutch Screening Visual Complaints questionnaire-acquired brain injury (SVCq-abi), a self-report 23-item questionnaire. A Dutch community sample of 1159 participants (Mean [SD] age, 60 [16] years) completed the SVCq-abi and other questionnaires on visual disturbances, executive functioning, mental health, and autistic traits. Confirmatory factor analyses were performed for 5 models (1-factor, 3-factor, 5-factor, second-order, and bifactor) on a random split of half of the sample, and cross-validated on the other half. In addition, we evaluated floor and ceiling effects, scale reliability, test-retest reliability, as well as convergent and divergent validity.
resultsA 5-factor structure of the SVCq-abi was adopted which showed an excellent model of fit, with all item loadings exceeding 0.5. The SVCq-abi subscales demonstrated various floor effects, acceptable scale reliability, moderate to good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.65 to 0.73), along with sufficient convergent (r2 = 9% to 32%) and divergent validity (r2 = 2% to 13%).
conclusionsThe SVCq-abi shows fundamental psychometric properties and the factor analysis provides support for a 5-factor structure. Further validation of the SVCq-abi in individuals with ABI is essential.
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.