Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 7/2013

01-09-2013

Evaluation of item candidates for a diabetic retinopathy quality of life item bank

Auteurs: Eva K. Fenwick, Konrad Pesudovs, Jyoti Khadka, Gwyn Rees, Tien Y. Wong, Ecosse L. Lamoureux

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 7/2013

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

We are developing an item bank assessing the impact of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on quality of life (QoL) using a rigorous multi-staged process combining qualitative and quantitative methods. We describe here the first two qualitative phases: content development and item evaluation.

Methods

After a comprehensive literature review, items were generated from four sources: (1) 34 previously validated patient-reported outcome measures; (2) five published qualitative articles; (3) eight focus groups and 18 semi-structured interviews with 57 DR patients; and (4) seven semi-structured interviews with diabetes or ophthalmic experts. Items were then evaluated during 3 stages, namely binning (grouping) and winnowing (reduction) based on key criteria and panel consensus; development of item stems and response options; and pre-testing of items via cognitive interviews with patients.

Results

The content development phase yielded 1,165 unique items across 7 QoL domains. After 3 sessions of binning and winnowing, items were reduced to a minimally representative set (n = 312) across 9 domains of QoL: visual symptoms; ocular surface symptoms; activity limitation; mobility; emotional; health concerns; social; convenience; and economic. After 8 cognitive interviews, 42 items were amended resulting in a final set of 314 items.

Conclusions

We have employed a systematic approach to develop items for a DR-specific QoL item bank. The psychometric properties of the nine QoL subscales will be assessed using Rasch analysis. The resulting validated item bank will allow clinicians and researchers to better understand the QoL impact of DR and DR therapies from the patient’s perspective.
vorige artikel Validation of the Food Allergy Quality of Life—Parental Burden Questionnaire in the UK
volgende artikel Psychometric characteristics of daily diaries for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®): a preliminary investigation
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Hobart, J., et al. (2007). Rating scales as outcome measures for clinical trials in neurology: Problems, solutions, and recommendations. Lancet Neurology, 6, 1094–1105.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Fenwick, E., et al. (2011). The impact of diabetic retinopathy: Understanding the patient’s perspective. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 95(6), 774–782.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Fenwick, E., et al. (2011). Social and emotional impact of diabetic retinopathy: A review. Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, 40(1), 27–38.
4.
Steinberg, E. P., et al. (1994). The VF-14: An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Archives of Ophthalmology, 112(5), 630–638.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Pesudovs, K., & Coster, D. J. (1998). An instrument for assessment of subjective visual disability in cataract patients. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 82(6), 617–624.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Mangione, C. M., et al. (1992). Development of the ‘Activities of Daily Vision Scale’. A measure of visual functional status. Medical Care, 30(12), 1111–1126.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Lamoureux, E., et al. (2007). The impact of vision impairment questionnaire: An assessment of its domain structure using confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch analysis. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 48, 1001–1006.CrossRef
8.
Lamoureux, E., et al. (2006). The Impact of Vision Impairment Questionnaire: An evaluation of its measurement properties using Rasch analysis. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 47, 4732–4741.CrossRef
9.
Mangione, C. M., et al. (2001). Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Archives of Ophthalmology, 119(7), 1050–1058.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Woodcock, A., et al. (2004). The influence of diabetic retinopathy on quality of life interviews to guide the design of a condition-specific, individualised questionnaire: The RetDQoL. Patient Education and Counseling, 53(3), 365–383.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Brose, L., & Bradley, C. (2009). Psychometric Development of the Individualized Retinopathy-Dependent Quality of Life Questionnaire (RetDQoL). Value Health, 14(6), 740–754.
12.
Vanalphen, A., et al. (1994). Likert or Rasch—Nothing is more applicable than good theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(1), 196–201.CrossRef
13.
Finger, R. P., Fenwick, E., Pesudovs, K., Marella, M., Lamoureux, E. L., & Holz, F. G. (2012). Rasch analysis reveals problems with multiplicative scoring in the macular disease quality of life questionnaire. Ophthalmology, 119(11), 2351–2357.
14.
Gothwal, V. K., et al. (2011). Multiplicative rating scales do not enable measurement of vision-related quality of life. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 94(1), 52–62.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Simo, R., & Hernandez, C. (2008). Intravitreous anti-VEGF for diabetic retinopathy: Hopes and fears for a new therapeutic strategy. Diabetologia, 51(9), 1574–1580.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Wirostko, B., Wong, T. Y., & Simo, R. (2008). Vascular endothelial growth factor and diabetic complications. Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, 27(6), 608–621.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Lai, J. S., et al. (2005). An item bank was created to improve the measurement of cancer-related fatigue. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(2), 190–197.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Forkmann, T., et al. (2009). Development of an item bank for the assessment of depression in persons with mental illnesses and physical diseases using Rasch analysis. Rehabilitation Psychology, 54(2), 186–197.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Pesudovs, K. (2010). Item banking: A generational change in patient-reported outcome measurement. Optometry and Vision Science, 87(4), 1–9.CrossRef
20.
Cella, D., et al. (2007). The future of outcomes measurement: Item banking, tailored short-forms, and computerized adaptive assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl 1), 133–141.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Lai, J. S., et al. (2003). Item banking to improve, shorten and computerize self-reported fatigue: An illustration of steps to create a core item bank from the FACIT-Fatigue Scale. Quality of Life Research, 12(5), 485–501.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Gershon, R. C. (2005). Computer adaptive testing. Journal of Applied Measurement, 6(1), 109–127.PubMed
23.
DeWalt, D. A., et al. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates—The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5), S12–S21.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Giesinger, J. M., et al. (2011). Cross-cultural development of an item list for computer-adaptive testing of fatigue in oncological patients. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9, 19–29.
25.
Bruce, B., et al. (2009). Better assessment of physical function: Item improvement is neglected but essential. Arthritis Research & Therapy, 11(6), R191.CrossRef
26.
WHOQOL Group. (1997). Measuring quality of life (pp. 1–13). Geneva: The World Health Organisation.
27.
Pesudovs, K., et al. (2010). Remediating serious flaws in the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 36(5), 718–732.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Finger, R. P., et al. (2011). The impact of the severity of vision loss on vision-related quality of life in India: An evaluation of the IND-VFQ-33. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 52(9), 6081–6088.CrossRef
29.
Massof, R. W., & Rubin, G. S. (2001). Visual function assessment questionnaires. Survey of Ophthalmology, 45(6), 531–548.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Margolis, M. K., et al. (2002). Vision-specific instruments for the assessment of health-related quality of life and visual functioning—A literature review. Pharmacoeconomics, 20(12), 791–812.CrossRefPubMed
31.
de Boer, M. R., et al. (2004). Psychometric properties of vision-related quality of life questionnaires: A systematic review. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 24(4), 257–273.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Devenney, R., & O’Neil, S. (2010). The experience of diabetic retinopathy: A qualitative study. British Journal of Health Psychology, 16(4), 707–721.CrossRef
33.
Coyne, K. S., et al. (2004). The impact of diabetic retinopathy: Perspectives from patient focus groups. Family Practice, 21(4), 447–453.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Oehlergiarratana, J., & Fitzgerald, R. G. (1980). Group-therapy with blind diabetics. Archives of General Psychiatry, 37(4), 463–467.CrossRef
35.
Scanlon, P. H., et al. (2006). Reported symptoms and quality-of-life impacts in patients having laser treatment for sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy. Diabetic Medicine, 23(1), 60–66.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Fenwick, E. K., Pesudovs, K., Khadka, J., Dirani, M., Rees, G., Wong, T. Y., & Lamoureux, E. L. (2012). The impact of diabetic retinopathy on quality of life: Qualitative findings from an item bank development project. Quality of Life Research. doi:10.​1007/​s11136-012-0110-1.
37.
Rice, P., & Ezzy, D. (1999). Qualitative research methods: A health focus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38.
Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (Eds.). (1994). Beginning qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
Gothwal, V. K., et al. (2009). Visual Activities Questionnaire: Assessment of subscale validity for cataract surgery outcomes. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 35(11), 1961–1969.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Pesudovs, K., Wright, T. A., & Gothwal, V. K. (2010). Visual disability assessment: Valid measurement of activity limitation and mobility in cataract patients. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 94(6), 777–781.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Jobe, J., & Mingay, D. (1989). Cognitive research improves questionnaires. American Journal of Public Health, 79(8), 1053–1055.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Willis, G. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Metagegevens
Titel
Evaluation of item candidates for a diabetic retinopathy quality of life item bank
Auteurs
Eva K. Fenwick
Konrad Pesudovs
Jyoti Khadka
Gwyn Rees
Tien Y. Wong
Ecosse L. Lamoureux
Publicatiedatum
01-09-2013
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 7/2013
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0307-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 7/2013

Quality of Life Research 7/2013 Naar de uitgave

Brief Communication

The psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire

OriginalPaper

Psychometric characteristics of daily diaries for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®): a preliminary investigation

OriginalPaper

Perception of stress level, trunk appearance, body function and mental health in females with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated conservatively: a longitudinal analysis

OriginalPaper

An investigation of the construct validity of the ICECAP-A capability measure

OriginalPaper

Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study

OriginalPaper

Philosophical perspectives on response shift