ArticlePloS one2025
A psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Impact of Vision Impairment (C-IVI) questionnaire in an adult cohort with high myopia using Rasch analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Impact of Vision Impairment (C-IVI) questionnaire in an adult cohort with high myopia using Rasch Analysis and determination of the relationship between vision-related quality-of-life (VRQoL) and myopia macular degeneration (MMD).
methodsWe used the baseline visit data of the AIER-Singapore Eye Research Institute (SERI) High Myopia Adult Cohort Study. VRQoL was assessed using the 28-item C-IVI. Rasch analysis was conducted to evaluate the overall C-IVI and domain scores ('Mobility and independence'-MB, 'Reading and accessing information'-RD, and 'Emotional well-being'-EWB), including response category functioning, precision, unidimensionality, targeting, and differential item functioning (DIF). The criterion validity, C-IVI's ability to distinguish participants based on severity of vision impairment (VI), spherical equivalent (SER), and the presence of MMD were analyzed using ANOVA and pairwise t-tests.
resultsThere were 431 participants, with mean (SD) age of 42.2 (7.1) years, SER of -8.3 (3.8) D, and visual acuity of 0.1 (0.2) LogMAR. Of these, 15.8% presented MMD, 79.4%, 13.5%, 7.0%, and 0.2% had no, mild, moderate, and severe VI, respectively. Response thresholds were ordered for the overall and three domains. The overall range-based precision was 0.94, and 0.80 for each domain. The three domains demonstrated unidimensionality. DIF was uniform in overall and EWB, but not the MB and RD domains. Person estimates decreased with increasing VI severity, worsening SER, and presenting MMD (all p < 0.05) for the overall and domain scores.
conclusionsThe C-IVI questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for assessing VRQoL in adults with high myopia in China.
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.