Suppr超能文献

低视力独立测量量表(LVIM)的测量效度

Measurement Validity of the Low Vision Independence Measure (LVIM).

作者信息

Smith Theresa M, Krishnan Shilpa, Hong Ickpyo, Reistetter Timothy A

机构信息

Theresa M. Smith, PhD, OTR, CLVT, is Associate Professor, School of Occupational Therapy, Texas Woman's University, Houston;

出版信息

Am J Occup Ther. 2019 May/Jun;73(3):7303205070p1-7303205070p11. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2019.031070.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study's objective was to test the psychometrics of Smith's (2013) Low Vision Independence Measure (LVIM) using the Rasch model.

METHOD

A cohort design was used with 93 participants receiving occupational therapy for low vision. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with a parceling approach was used to test the LVIM factors and Rasch analysis to examine item-level psychometrics.

RESULTS

Participants' average age was 78.9 yr (standard deviation = 12.1), and the majority were female (72.8%) with macular degeneration (62.3%). The CFA revealed two measurement factors: visual field or scotoma (n = 28) and visual acuity (n = 24). We removed six misfitting items, and the two factors of the revised LVIM demonstrated good rating scale function, good internal consistency (person reliability: visual field, .87; visual acuity, .90), good precision (person strata: visual field, 3.91; visual acuity, 4.40), no ceiling or floor effects, and no differential item functioning.

CONCLUSION

The revised LVIM demonstrates good psychometrics on the Rasch model and can be used as a valid outcome measure in low vision rehabilitation.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在使用拉施模型检验史密斯(2013年)的低视力独立测量量表(LVIM)的心理测量学特性。

方法

采用队列设计,93名接受低视力职业治疗的参与者纳入研究。使用带有分组方法的验证性因素分析(CFA)来检验LVIM因素,并使用拉施分析来检查项目层面的心理测量学特性。

结果

参与者的平均年龄为78.9岁(标准差 = 12.1),大多数为女性(72.8%),患有黄斑变性(62.3%)。CFA揭示了两个测量因素:视野或暗点(n = 28)和视力(n = 24)。我们剔除了6个拟合不佳的项目,修订后的LVIM的两个因素表现出良好的量表功能、良好的内部一致性(个人信度:视野,0.87;视力,0.90)、良好的精度(个人分层:视野,3.91;视力,4.40),没有天花板效应或地板效应,也没有项目功能差异。

结论

修订后的LVIM在拉施模型上表现出良好的心理测量学特性,可作为低视力康复中的有效结局测量指标。

相似文献

1
Measurement Validity of the Low Vision Independence Measure (LVIM).
Am J Occup Ther. 2019 May/Jun;73(3):7303205070p1-7303205070p11. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2019.031070.
2
Responsiveness of the Revised Low Vision Independence Measure (LVIM-R).
Am J Occup Ther. 2020 Sep/Oct;74(5):7405205040p1-7405205040p11. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2020.038307.
4
Rasch analysis of the Indian vision function questionnaire.
Br J Ophthalmol. 2012 May;96(5):619-23. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-300092. Epub 2012 Feb 2.
5
An evaluation of the reliability and validity of the visual functioning questionnaire (VF-11) using Rasch analysis in an Asian population.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Jun;50(6):2607-13. doi: 10.1167/iovs.08-2359. Epub 2009 Jan 31.
6
The psychometric validity of the NEI VFQ-25 for use in a low-vision population.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010 Jun;51(6):2878-84. doi: 10.1167/iovs.09-4494. Epub 2010 Jan 20.
7
A new look at the WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument among visually impaired people using Rasch analysis.
Qual Life Res. 2013 May;22(4):839-51. doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0195-6. Epub 2012 May 22.
8
The impact of the severity of vision loss on vision-specific functioning in a German outpatient population - an observational study.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011 Aug;249(8):1245-53. doi: 10.1007/s00417-011-1646-4. Epub 2011 Apr 5.
9
Remediating serious flaws in the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010 May;36(5):718-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.11.019.
10
Development of the functional vision questionnaire for children and young people with visual impairment: the FVQ_CYP.
Ophthalmology. 2013 Dec;120(12):2725-2732. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.055. Epub 2013 Oct 10.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Visual Impairment and Blindness in Adults in the United States: Demographic and Geographic Variations From 2015 to 2050.
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016 Jul 1;134(7):802-9. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.1284.
2
Results from a survey of occupational therapy practitioners in low vision rehabilitation.
Occup Ther Health Care. 2007;21(4):19-37. doi: 10.1080/J003v21n04_02.
3
Quality assessment of ophthalmic questionnaires: review and recommendations.
Optom Vis Sci. 2013 Aug;90(8):720-44. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000001.
4
Generating clinical outputs for self-reports of visual functioning.
Optom Vis Sci. 2013 Aug;90(8):765-75. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000007.
6
How effective is low vision service provision? A systematic review.
Surv Ophthalmol. 2012 Jan-Feb;57(1):34-65. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2011.06.006. Epub 2011 Oct 21.
8
Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research: a systematic review of vision instruments.
Qual Life Res. 2011 Sep;20(7):1141-58. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9831-1. Epub 2011 Jan 4.
9
Aging and vision.
Vision Res. 2011 Jul 1;51(13):1610-22. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.10.020. Epub 2010 Oct 23.
10
Occupational therapy practice framework: domain & practice, 2nd edition.
Am J Occup Ther. 2008 Nov-Dec;62(6):625-83. doi: 10.5014/ajot.62.6.625.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验