ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2026
Translation and Validation of the Low Luminance Questionnaire in the Chinese Population.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To translate and validate a Chinese version of the Low Luminance Questionnaire (LLQ). Methods: The original LLQ was translated into Chinese by two ophthalmologists and back-translated by a professional translator. Between 2022 and 2023, participants with visual impairment were recruited from Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center. The method of successive dichotomizations (MSD) was used to assess the separation index, reliability, item misfit, and differential item functioning (DIF) of the questionnaire; principal component analysis was also used to assess unidimensionality. Linear regression analyzed the relationship between participant demographics and MSD person measures based on the Chinese LLQ. Results: A total of 173 participants (67.05% female) with an average age of 65.73 years were included, and all completed the Chinese version of the LLQ. After taking into account item fit, content validity, targeting, and cultural adaptation to the Chinese context, eight items were removed, yielding a final 24-item Chinese LLQ (LLQ-24). This version showed good separation (person, 3.47; item, 7.61) and reliability (person, 0.92; item, 0.98), although person-item targeting was suboptimal, with person measures averaging 1.63 logits higher than item measures. A few items showed DIF across age and gender. Participants with worse visual acuity and those with cataract had lower scores on the LLQ-24. Conclusions: The 24-item Chinese LLQ provides a useful tool with fair validity and reliability to assess low luminance visual difficulties in the Chinese population. Translational Relevance: The Chinese LLQ enables eyecare professionals to more accurately assess and manage vision-related conditions in low-light environments.
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.