ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Validity and Reliability of the CVI Range for Clinical Research: Baseline and One-Year Results.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Cerebral/cortical visual impairment (CVI) is a leading cause of visual impairment in children and significantly impacts both visual function and functional vision (the ability to use vision during everyday activities). We developed the CVI Range for Clinical Research (CVI Range-CR), a functional vision assessment that can be incorporated in CVI clinical trials. Herein we evaluate the psychometric properties, interrater and intrarater reliability, and validity of the CVI Range-CR. Design: A prospective, longitudinal cohort study. Participants: Forty children with CVI. Methods: Participants underwent CVI Range-CR assessments at baseline and 1-year follow-up. All assessments were recorded. A trained in-person examiner scored in-person assessments; 2 expert remote graders scored recorded assessments. Visual acuity was evaluated by a pediatric neuro-ophthalmologist using the 6-level visual behavior scale (VBS). Main Outcome Measures: The CVI Range-CR scores (ranging from 0 to 10) using the Across-CVI Characteristics (rating 1) and Within-CVI Characteristics (rating 2) methods of scoring were compared among graders using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess interrater reliability. A subset of videos was scored twice by the same remote examiner to assess intrarater reliability using the ICC. The CVI Range-CR scores were compared to VBS scores (Spearman's correlation coefficient, ⍴) to evaluate validity. McDonald's ω was used to assess internal consistency of the 10 items on the Within-CVI Characteristics scale. Results: The CVI Range-CR demonstrated high internal consistency (McDonald's ω = 0.96), excellent intrarater reliability (ICC = 0.88-0.98), good-to-excellent interrater reliability (ICC = 0.74-0.88), and strong correlation to clinical assessment of visual behavior as measured by VBS scores (Spearman's ⍴ = 0.76-0.86, Conclusions: The CVI Range-CR is a reliable and valid measure of functional vision in children with CVI. Because intrarater reliability exceeds interrater reliability, longitudinal studies are recommended to use consistent graders over time. This could be accomplished by remote grading of recorded assessments via a centralized reading center. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.