Impact of General Health Status on Validity of Visual Impairment Measurement

REFERENCES

• Globe D R, Varma R, Torres M, et al. Self-reported comorbidities and visual function in a population-based study: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Arch Ophthalmol 2005; 123(6)815–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Massof R W. The measurement of vision disability. Optom Vis Sci 2002; 79(8)516–52
   Google Scholar
• Congdon N, O'Colmain B, Klaver C C, et al. Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the united states. Arch Ophthalmol 2004; 122(4)477–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey R N, Indian R W, Zhang X, et al. Visual impairment and eye care among older adults - five states, 2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2006; 55(49)1321–25
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnson R J, Wolinsky F D. The structure of health status among older adults: Disease, disability, functional limitation, and perceived health. J Health Soc Behav 1993; 34(2)105–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teresi J A, Fleishman J A. Differential item functioning and health assessment. Qual Life Res 2007
   Google Scholar
• Brody B L, Gamst A C, Williams R A, et al. Depression, visual acuity, comorbidity, and disability associated with age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 2001; 108(10), 1893,900; discussion 1900–1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park W L, Mayer R S, Moghimi C, et al. Rehabilitation of hospital inpatients with visual impairments and disabilities from systemic illness. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86(1)79–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Globe D R, Wu J, Azen S P, et al. The impact of visual impairment on self-reported visual functioning in latinos: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Ophthalmology 2004; 111(6)1141–49
   Google Scholar
• Miskala P H, Bressler N M, Meinert C L. Is adjustment of national eye institute visual function questionnaire scores for general health necessary in randomized trials?. Am J Ophthalmol 2004; 137(5)961–63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massof R W. Likert And Guttman Scaling Of Visual Function Rating Scale Questionnaires. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2004; 11(5)381–99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright B D, Linacre J M. Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1989; 70(12)857–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dallmeijer A J, Dekker J, Roorda L D, et al. Differential item functioning of the functional independence measure in higher performing neurological patients. J Rehabil Med 2005; 37(6)346–52
   Google Scholar
• Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: The PRO-ESOR project. Med Care 2004; 42(1 Suppl)I37–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merritt B K, Fisher A G. Gender differences in the performance of activities of daily living. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84(12)1872–77
   Google Scholar
• Wilson I B, Cleary P D. Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes. JAMA 1995; 273(1)59–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fayers P M, Hays R D. Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2005
   Google Scholar
• Massof R W, Hsu C T, Baker F H, et al. Visual disability variables. II: The difficulty of tasks for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86(5)954–67
   Google Scholar
• Massof R W, Hsu C T, Baker F H, et al. Visual disability variables. I: The importance and difficulty of activity goals for a sample of low-vision patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86(5)946–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh-Manoux A, Gueguen A, Martikainen P, et al. Self-rated health and mortality: Short- and long-term associations in the Whitehall II Study. Psychosom Med 2007; 69(2)138–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ried L D, Tueth M J, Handberg E, et al. Validating a self-report measure of global subjective well-being to predict adverse clinical outcomes. Qual Life Res 2006; 15(4)675–86
   Google Scholar
• Schou M B, Krokstad S, Westin S. How is self-rated health associated with mortality?. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2006; 126(20)2644–2647
   Google Scholar
• Fayers P M, Sprangers M A. Understanding self-rated health. Lancet 2002; 359(9302)187–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkinson C, Wright L, Coulter A. Criterion validity and reliability of the SF-36 in a population sample. Qual Life Res 1994; 3(1)7–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSalvo K B, Fan V S, McDonell M B, et al. Predicting mortality and healthcare utilization with a single question. Health Serv Res 2005; 40(4)1234–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSalvo K B, Bloser N, Reynolds K, et al. Mortality prediction with a single general self-rated health question. A meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21(3)267–75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 1978; 435: 61–73
   Google Scholar
• Massof R W. A systems model for low vision rehabilitation. II. measurement of vision disabilities. Optom Vis Sci 1998; 75(5)349–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massof R W. A systems model for low vision rehabilitation. I. basic concepts. Optom Vis Sci 1995; 72(10)725–36
   Google Scholar
• Massof R W, Ahmadian L, Grover L L, et al. The activity inventory: An adaptive visual function questionnaire. Optom Vis Sci 2007; 84(8)763–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massof R W. Application of stochastic measurement models to visual function rating scale questionnaires. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2005; 12(2)103–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massof R W. Likert and Guttman Scaling Of Visual Function Rating Scale Questionnaires. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2004; 11(5)381–99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson E B, Hilferty M M. The distribution of chi-square. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1931; 17(12)684–88
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petersen M A, Groenvold M, Bjorner J B, et al. Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire. Qual Life Res 2003; 12(4)373–85
   Google Scholar
• Groenvold M, Bjorner J B, Klee M C, et al. Test for item bias in a quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48(6)805–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groenvold M, Petersen M A. The role and use of differential item functioning(DIF) analysis of quality of life data from clinical trials, P M Fayers, R D Hays. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2005; 195–207
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps. World Health Organization, Geneva 1980
   Google Scholar
• Bond T G, Fox C M. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ 2007
   Google Scholar
• RUMM Laboratory Pty Ltd. Interpreting RUMM2020. July, 2005
   Google Scholar
• Wright B D, Panchapakestan N. A procedure for sample-free item analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1969; 29: 23–48
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland P W, Thayer D T. Differential item performance and the Mantel–Haenszel procedure. Test Validity, H. Wainer, H. Brain. LEA, Hillsdale, NJ 1988; 129–45
   Google Scholar
• “Tennant A” “Pallant JF” DIF matters: A practical approach to test if differential item functioning makes a difference. Rasch Measurement Transactions 2007; 20(4)1082–84
   Google Scholar
• Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: The PRO-ESOR project. Med Care 2004; 42(1 Suppl)I37–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hambleton R K. Good practices for identifying differential item functioning. Med Care 2006; 44(11 Suppl 3)S182–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar