Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
Volume 35, Issue 9 , Pages 1509-1517 , September 2009

Using Rasch analysis to revisit the validity of the Cataract TyPE Spec instrument for measuring cataract surgery outcomes

Received 27 January 2009 ,Accepted 30 March 2009.

References 

  1. McCarty CA, Mukesh BN, Fu CL, Taylor HR. The epidemiology of cataract in Australia. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;128:446–465
  2. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol. 1996;24:313–317
  3. Taylor HR. Cataract: how much surgery do we have to do?. [editorial] Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:1–2Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1723236&blobtype=pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  4. Desai P, Reidy A, Minassian DC, Vafidis G, Bolger J. Gains from cataract surgery: visual function and quality of life. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80:868–873Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=505640&blobtype=pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  5. Mönestam E, Wachtmeister L. Dissatisfaction with cataract surgery in relation to visual results in a population-based study in Sweden. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25:1127–1134
  6. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. Vision change and quality of life in the elderly; response to cataract surgery and treatment of other chronic ocular conditions. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:680–685Available at: http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/111/5/680Accessed May 24, 2009
  7. Mangione CM, Phillips R, Seddon JM, Lawrence MG, Cook EF, Dailey R, et al. Development of the ‘Activities of Daily Vision Scale.’ A measure of visual functional status. Med Care. 1992;30:1111–1126
  8. Mangione CM, Orav EJ, Lawrence MG, Phillips RS, Seddon JM, Goldman L. Prediction of visual function after cataract surgery; a prospectively validated model. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:1305–1311Available at: http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/113/10/1305Accessed May 24, 2009
  9. Pesudovs K, Coster DJ. An instrument for assessment of subjective visual disability in cataract patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82:617–624Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1722619&blobtype=pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  10. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, Javitt JC, Sharkey P, Cassard SD, et al. The VF-14; an index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:630–638Available at: http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/112/5/630Accessed May 24, 2009
  11. Lundström M, Roos P, Jensen S, Fregell G. Catquest questionnaire for use in cataract surgery care: description, validity, and reliability. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997;23:1226–1236
  12. Javitt JC, Jacobson G, Schiffman RM. Validity and reliability of the Cataract TyPE Spec: an instrument for measuring outcomes of cataract extraction. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136:285–290
  13. Lawrence DJ, Brogan C, Benjamin L, Pickard D, Stewart-Brown S. Measuring the effectiveness of cataract surgery: the reliability and validity of a visual function outcomes instrument. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:66–70Available: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1722791&blobtype=pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  14. Massof RW, Rubin GS. Visual function assessment questionnaires. Surv Ophthalmol. 2001;45:531–548
  15. Massof RW. The measurement of vision disability. Optom Vis Sci. 2002;79:516–552Available at: http://www.optvissci.com/pt/re/ovs/pdfhandler.00006324-200208000-00015.pdf%3Bjsessionid=KZYSBB5kbwjgJ6YYXzpgLywwBK16QcpSb8q3bQGC31s8vY3cdGzj!-701738752!181195629!8091!-1Accessed May 24, 2009
  16. Rasch G. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Institute of Educational Research; 1960;
  17. Pesudovs K, Burr JM, Harley C, Elliott DB. The development, assessment, and selection of questionnaires. Optom Vis Sci. 2007;84:664–675Available at: http://www.optvissci.com/pt/re/ovs/pdfhandler.00006324-200708000-00005.pdf;jsessionid=KZcJrBxMKHzzcx4VGhCDgGwV2vDSD5HknjcG729LKxDlX1XPvfm1!-701738752!181195629!8091!-1Accessed May 24, 2009
  18. Mallinson T. Why measurement matters for measuring patient vision outcomes. Optom Vis Sci. 2007;84;Available at: http://www.optvissci.com/pt/re/ovs/pdfhandler.00006324-200708000-00006.pdf;jsessionid=KZcW21QvZ9vvSbXT2Y5S7dNchsSTlwjP2TbTJFyJJYG2tgLLc2LR!-701738752!181195629!8091!-1Accessed May 24, 2009
  19. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Keeves JP, Elliott DB. The Activities of Daily Vision Scale for cataract surgery outcomes: re-evaluating validity with Rasch analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:2892–2899Available at: http://www.iovs.org/cgi/reprint/44/7/2892Accessed May 24, 2009
  20. Velozo CA, Lai J-S, Mallinson T, Hauselman E. Maintaining instrument quality while reducing items: application of Rasch analysis to a self-report of visual function. J Outcome Meas. 2000–2001;4:667–680
  21. Lundström M, Pesudovs K. Catquest-9SF patient outcomes questionnaire; nine-item short-form Rasch-scaled revision of the Catquest questionnaire. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35:504–513
  22. Garamendi E, Pesudovs K, Stevens MJ, Elliott DB. The Refractive Status and Vision Profile: evaluation of psychometric properties and comparison of Rasch and summated Likert-scaling. Vision Res. 2006;46:1375–1383
  23. Pesudovs K. Patient-centred measurement in ophthalmology – a paradigm shift. [commentary] BMC Ophthalmol. 2006;6:25;Available at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2415-6-25.pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  24. Norquist JM, Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J, Jenkinson C. Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Med Care. 2004;42(suppl 1):I25–I36
  25. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB. The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) Questionnaire: development and validation. Optom Vis Sci. 2004;81:769–777Available at: http://www.optvissci.com/pt/re/ovs/pdfhandler.00006324-200410000-00009.pdf;jsessionid=KZlQrwyhmlzpQ0JgPykLn0wJq9FlTyYqrNBBQCG2kTPPcB41qvh1!-1775402713!181195628!8091!-1Accessed May 24, 2009
  26. Elliott DB, Hurst MA, Weatherill J. Comparing clinical tests of visual function in cataract with the patient's perceived visual disability. Eye. 1990;4:712–717
  27. Rubin GS, Muñoz B, Bandeen-Roche K, West SK. Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability; for the SEE Project Team. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:3327–3334Available at: http://www.iovs.org/cgi/reprint/41/11/3327Accessed May 24, 2009
  28. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating Scale Analysis (Rasch Measurement Book). Chicago, IL: MESA Press; 1982;
  29. Linacre JM, Wright BD. A User's Guide to WINSTEPS: Rasch model computer program. Chicago, IL: MESA Press; 2000;
  30. Linacre JM. A User's Guide to WINSTEPS/MINISTEPS;. Rasch-Model Computer Programs. Chicago, IL: MESA Press; 2009;Available at: http://www.winsteps.com/winman/index.htm?copyright.htmAccessed May 24, 2009
  31. Andrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika. 1978;43:561–573
  32. Lamoureux EL, Pallant JF, Pesudovs K, Hassell JB, Keeffe JE. The impact of vision impairment questionnaire: an evaluation of its measurement properties using Rasch analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:4732–4741Available at: http://www.iovs.org/cgi/reprint/47/11/4732Accessed May 24, 2009
  33. Massof RW, Fletcher DC. Evaluation of the NEI visual functioning questionnaire as an interval measure of visual ability in low vision. Vision Res. 2001;41:397–413
  34. Velozo CA, Lai J-S, Mallinson T, Hauselman E. Maintaining instrument quality while reducing items: application of Rasch analysis to a self-report of visual function. J Outcome Meas. 2000–2001;4:667–680
  35. Comins J, Brodersen J, Krogsgaard M, Beyer N. Rasch analysis of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): a statistical re-evaluation. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2008;18:336–345
  36. Wolfe F, Michaud K, Pincus T. Development and validation of the Health Assessment Questionnaire II; a revised version of the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:3296–3305Available at: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/109677229/PDFSTARTAccessed May 24, 2009
  37. Smith EV. Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation: a Rasch measurement perspective. J Appl Meas. 2001;2:281–311
  38. Wright BD, Linacre JM. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions. 1994;8:370;Available at: http://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt83b.htmAccessed May 24, 2009
  39. Smith RM. Person fit in the Rasch model. Educ Psychol Measurement. 1986;46:359–372
  40. Smith EV. Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Meas. 2002;3:205–231
  41. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2001;
  42. Linacre JM. A User's Guide to WINSTEPS. Chicago, IL: MESA Press; 2009;
  43. Teresi JA. Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications. advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics. Med Care. 2006;44:S152–S170
  44. In:  Holland PW,  Wainer H editor. Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1993;
  45. Wright BD, Douglas GA. Best Test Design and Self-Tailored Testing. MESA Research Memorandum No. 19. Statistical Laboratory, Department of Education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago; 1975;
  46. Wright BD, Douglas GA. Rasch Item Analysis by Hand. MESA Research Memorandum Number 21. Statistical Laboratory, Department of Education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago; 1976;
  47. Mallinson T, Stelmack J, Velozo C. A comparison of the separation ratio and coefficient α in the creation of minimum item sets. Med Care. 2004;42(suppl 1):I17–I24
  48. Lamoureux EL, Pesudovs K, Pallant JF, Rees G, Hassell JB, Caudle LE, et al. An evaluation of the 10-item vision core measure 1 (VCM1) scale (the Core Module of the Vision-Related Quality of Life scale) using Rasch analysis. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2008;15:224–233
  49. Leinonen J, Laatikainen L. Changes in visual acuity of patients undergoing cataract surgery during the last two decades. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2002;80:506–511
  50. Foster A. Vision 2020: the cataract challenge. [editorial] J Comm Eye Health. 2000;13(34):17–19Available at: http://www.cehjournal.org/download/ceh_13_34_017.pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  51. Pesudovs K, Caudle LE, Rees G, Lamoureux EL. Validity of a visual impairment questionnaire in measuring cataract surgery outcomes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34:925–933
  52. Globe D, Varma R, Azen SP, Paz S, Yu E, Preston-Martin S Los Angeles Latino Eye Study Group. Psychometric performance of the NEI VFQ-25 in visually normal Latinos: the Los Angeles Latino eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:1470–1478Available at: http://www.iovs.org/cgi/reprint/44/4/1470Accessed May 24, 2009
  53. Massof RW, Hsu CT, Baker FH, Barnett GD, Park WL, Deremeik JT, et al. Visual disability variables. II: The difficulty of tasks for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:954–967Available at: http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/0003-9993/PIIS0003999304013978.pdfAccessed May 24, 2009
  54. Lai J-S, Cella D, Dineen K, Bode R, Von Roenn J, Gershon RC, et al. An item bank was created to improve the measurement of cancer-related fatigue. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:190–197
  55. Walter OB, Becker J, Bjorner JB, Fliege H, Klapp BF, Rose M. Development and evaluation of a computer adaptive test for ‘Anxiety’ (Anxiety-CAT). Qual Life Res. 2007;16(suppl 1):143–155

 No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

 Supported in part by National Health and Medical Research Council, Centre of Clinical Research Excellence Grant 264620, Canberra, Australia.

PII: S0886-3350(09)00576-8

doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.03.056

Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
Volume 35, Issue 9 , Pages 1509-1517 , September 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution