Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research

a systematic review of vision instruments

Jemaima Che Hamzah, Jennifer M Burr, Craig R Ramsay, Augusto Azuara-Blanco, Maria Prior

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity. METHODS: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English, reporting use of vision instruments in glaucoma studies involving adults were included. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify additional studies describing development and/or validation to ascertain the final version of the instruments. Instruments' content was then mapped onto a theoretical framework, the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusion and quality assessed instrument content. RESULTS: Thirty-three instruments were identified. Instruments were categorised into thirteen vision status, two vision disability, one vision satisfaction, five glaucoma status, one glaucoma medication related to health status, five glaucoma medication side effects and six glaucoma medication satisfaction measures according to each instruments' content. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, Impact of Vision Impairment and Treatment Satisfaction Survey-Intraocular Pressure had the highest number of positive ratings in the content validity assessment. CONCLUSION: This study provides a descriptive catalogue of vision-specific PRO instruments, to inform the choice of an appropriate measure of patient-reported outcomes in a glaucoma context.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1141-1158
Number of pages18
JournalQuality of Life Research
Volume20
Issue number7
Early online date4 Jan 2011
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2011

Fingerprint

Glaucoma
Research
MEDLINE
National Eye Institute (U.S.)
International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health
Vision Disorders
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Intraocular Pressure
Health Status
Observational Studies
Randomized Controlled Trials

Cite this

Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research : a systematic review of vision instruments. / Che Hamzah, Jemaima; Burr, Jennifer M; Ramsay, Craig R; Azuara-Blanco, Augusto; Prior, Maria.

In: Quality of Life Research, Vol. 20, No. 7, 09.2011, p. 1141-1158.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Che Hamzah, Jemaima ; Burr, Jennifer M ; Ramsay, Craig R ; Azuara-Blanco, Augusto ; Prior, Maria. / Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research : a systematic review of vision instruments. In: Quality of Life Research. 2011 ; Vol. 20, No. 7. pp. 1141-1158.
@article{35ce98eeedff48d4b82b361f61bd4760,
title = "Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research: a systematic review of vision instruments",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity. METHODS: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English, reporting use of vision instruments in glaucoma studies involving adults were included. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify additional studies describing development and/or validation to ascertain the final version of the instruments. Instruments' content was then mapped onto a theoretical framework, the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusion and quality assessed instrument content. RESULTS: Thirty-three instruments were identified. Instruments were categorised into thirteen vision status, two vision disability, one vision satisfaction, five glaucoma status, one glaucoma medication related to health status, five glaucoma medication side effects and six glaucoma medication satisfaction measures according to each instruments' content. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, Impact of Vision Impairment and Treatment Satisfaction Survey-Intraocular Pressure had the highest number of positive ratings in the content validity assessment. CONCLUSION: This study provides a descriptive catalogue of vision-specific PRO instruments, to inform the choice of an appropriate measure of patient-reported outcomes in a glaucoma context.",
author = "{Che Hamzah}, Jemaima and Burr, {Jennifer M} and Ramsay, {Craig R} and Augusto Azuara-Blanco and Maria Prior",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1007/s11136-010-9831-1",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "1141--1158",
journal = "Quality of Life Research",
issn = "0962-9343",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Choosing appropriate patient-reported outcomes instrument for glaucoma research

T2 - a systematic review of vision instruments

AU - Che Hamzah, Jemaima

AU - Burr, Jennifer M

AU - Ramsay, Craig R

AU - Azuara-Blanco, Augusto

AU - Prior, Maria

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - PURPOSE: To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity. METHODS: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English, reporting use of vision instruments in glaucoma studies involving adults were included. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify additional studies describing development and/or validation to ascertain the final version of the instruments. Instruments' content was then mapped onto a theoretical framework, the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusion and quality assessed instrument content. RESULTS: Thirty-three instruments were identified. Instruments were categorised into thirteen vision status, two vision disability, one vision satisfaction, five glaucoma status, one glaucoma medication related to health status, five glaucoma medication side effects and six glaucoma medication satisfaction measures according to each instruments' content. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, Impact of Vision Impairment and Treatment Satisfaction Survey-Intraocular Pressure had the highest number of positive ratings in the content validity assessment. CONCLUSION: This study provides a descriptive catalogue of vision-specific PRO instruments, to inform the choice of an appropriate measure of patient-reported outcomes in a glaucoma context.

AB - PURPOSE: To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity. METHODS: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English, reporting use of vision instruments in glaucoma studies involving adults were included. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify additional studies describing development and/or validation to ascertain the final version of the instruments. Instruments' content was then mapped onto a theoretical framework, the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusion and quality assessed instrument content. RESULTS: Thirty-three instruments were identified. Instruments were categorised into thirteen vision status, two vision disability, one vision satisfaction, five glaucoma status, one glaucoma medication related to health status, five glaucoma medication side effects and six glaucoma medication satisfaction measures according to each instruments' content. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, Impact of Vision Impairment and Treatment Satisfaction Survey-Intraocular Pressure had the highest number of positive ratings in the content validity assessment. CONCLUSION: This study provides a descriptive catalogue of vision-specific PRO instruments, to inform the choice of an appropriate measure of patient-reported outcomes in a glaucoma context.

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-010-9831-1

DO - 10.1007/s11136-010-9831-1

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 1141

EP - 1158

JO - Quality of Life Research

JF - Quality of Life Research

SN - 0962-9343

IS - 7

ER -