References
- Streiner DL, Norman GR, editors. Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. Oxford, New York, Tokyo: Oxford University Press, 1995.
- Siemiatycki J, Campbell S, Richardson L, Aubert D. Quality of response in different population groups in mail and telephone surveys. Am J Epidemiol 1984;120: 302–14.
- Frost NA, Sparrow JM, Durant JS, Donovan JL, Peters TJ, Brookes ST. Development of a questionnaire for measurement of vision-related quality of life. Ophthalm Epidemiol 1998;5:185–210.
- Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. 1st ed. London: Chapman & Hall, 1991:455 (ISBN o 412 27630 5).
- Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. Standard Occupational Classification. London: HMSO, 1990: Vol. 3, Appx.A. Table AL
- Quereshi KN, Hodkinson HM. Evaluation of a ten-question mental test in the institutionalized elderly. Age & Ageing 1974;3:152–7.
- Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-I4. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol 1994;112:630–8.
- Pesudovs K, Coster DJ. An instrument for assessment of subjective visual disability in cataract patients. Br J Ophthalmol 1998;82:617–24.
- Mangione CM, Lee PP, Pitts J, Gutierrez P, Berry S, Hays RD. Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ). Arch Ophthalmol 1998;116: 1496–1504.
- Klein BEK, Klein R, Lee KE, Cruickshanks KJ. Associations of performance-based and self-reported measures of visual function. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalm Epidemiol 1999;6: 49–60.
- Mangione CM, Phillips RS, Seddon JM, et al. Development of the 'Activities of Daily Vision Scale'. A measure of visual functional status. Med Care 1992;30:1III–26.
- Cassard SD, Patrick DL, Damiano AM, et al. Reproducibility and responsiveness of the VF-I4. Arch Ophthalmol 1995;, 13:1508–13.
- Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. National study of cataract surgery outcomes: Variation in 4-month postoperative outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. Ophthalmology 1994;101: 1131–41.
- Siemiatycki J. A comparison of mail, telephone and home interview strategies for household health surveys. Am J Publ Health 1979;69: 238–45.
- Galobardes B, Sunyer J, Anto JM, et al. Effect of the method of administration, mail or telephone, on the validity and reliability of a respiratory health questionnaire. The Spanish centres of the European Asthma Study. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:875–81.
- Groves RM, Biemer PP, Lyberg LE, Massey JT, Nicholls WL, Waksberg J, editors. Telephone survey methodology. New York: Wiley, 1988.
- Korner-Bitensky N, Wood- Dauphinee S, Siemiatycki J, Shapiro S, Becker R. Health-related information postdischarge: Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:1287–96.
- Shinar D, Gross CR, Bronstein KS, et al. Reliablity of the Activities of Daily Living Scale and its use in telephone interview. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987;68:723–8.
- Sykes W, Collins M. Effects of mode of interview: Experiments in the UK. In: Groves RM, Biemer PP, Lyberg LE, Massey JT, Nicholls WL, Waksberg J, editors. Telephone survey methodology. New York: Wiley, 1988.
- Herzog AR, Rodgers WL, Kulka RA. Interviewing older adults: A comparison of telephone and face-to-face modalities. Publ Opinion Q 1983;47:405–18.
- Elliott DB, Patla A, Bullimore MA. Improvements in clinical and functional and perceived visual disability after first and second eye cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 1997;81:889–95.
- Pal B. Following up outpatients by telephone: pilot study. Br Med J 1998;316:1647.