ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
Validation of Malay-vision disability assessment (VDA) questionnaire and its application to assess the functional disability among cataract patients of a tertiary medical centre in Malaysia.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the Malay-Visual Disability Assessment (VDA) questionnaire and to assess its applicability in evaluating functional disability among cataract patients of a tertiary medical centre in Malaysia.
methodsThis cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was divided into two phases. In Phase I, the pre-final version of Malay-VDA was validated by a panel of six experts, followed by cognitive debriefing with 10 respondents. Test-retest reliability was assessed using 35 participants. The reliability and validity of the Malay-VDA was tested using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and content validity index (CVI). Phase II evaluated the visual function among 200 cataract patients using the validated Malay-VDA. Additionally, self-administered questionnaire was used to collect sociodemographic data of the respondents.
resultsIn Phase I, all items in Malay-VDA achieved an item-level CVI of > 0.8 for relevance and > 0.7 for clarity, with an overall CVI > 0.9. The test-retest reliability analysis demonstrated excellent reliability, with a single measures ICC of 0.998 (95% CI: 0.995-0.999, p < 0.001) and an average measures ICC of 0.999 (95% CI: 0.998-0.999, p < 0.001). In Phase II, out of the 200 respondents, they were more Chinese, females, had completed primary education and aged between 70 to 79 years. The respondents had higher VDA scores in distance domain with the mean (SD) scores of 16.57 (5.11), showing worst functional disability in distant activities, followed by difficulties in the mobility domain (mean (SD) scores of 10.15 (3.72)) and near domain (mean (SD) scores of 9.98 (2.76)). The mean score was found to be significantly higher in the poor vision group for all three domains. A positive correlation with moderate strength was found between total VDA score and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) with age adjusted (r = 0.575, p < 0.001).
conclusionThe Malay-VDA demonstrated good reliability and validity, making it a suitable tool for local adaptation. This study highlighted that visual function was not solely determined by visual acuity, underscoring the importance of comprehensive functional assessment in cataract patients. Therefore, integrating visual function assessment into preoperative evaluations could enhance surgical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40381114What 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.