Cataract Symptom Score Questionnaire: Rasch Revalidation

An alternative application of Rasch analysis to assess data from ophthalmic patient-reported outcome instruments

Purpose

To highlight the potential shortcomings associated with the current use Rasch analysis for validation of ophthalmic questionnaires, and to present an alternative application of Rasch analysis to derive insights specific to the cohort of patients under investigation.

Methods

An alternative application of Rasch analysis was used to investigate the quality of vision (QoV) for a cohort of 481 patients. Patients received multifocal intraocular lenses and completed a QoV questionnaire one and twelve months post-operatively. The rating scale variant of the polytomous Rasch model was utilized. The parameters of the model were estimated using the joint maximum likelihood estimation. Analysis was performed on data at both post-operative assessments, and the outcomes were compared.

Results

The distribution of the location of symptoms altered between assessments with the most annoyed patients completely differing. One month post-operatively, the most prevalent symptom was starbursts compared to glare at twelve months. The visual discomfort from the most annoyed patients is substantially higher at twelve months. The current most advocated approach for validating questionnaires using Rasch analysis found that the questionnaire was “Rasch-valid” one month post-operatively and “Rasch-invalid” twelve months post-operatively.

Conclusion

The proposed alternative application of Rasch analysis to questionnaires can be used as an effective decision support tool at population and individual level. At population level, this new approach enables one to investigate the prevalence of symptoms across different cohorts of patients. At individual level, the new approach enables one to identify patients with poor QoV over time. This study highlights some of the potential shortcomings associated with the current use of Rasch analysis to validate questionnaires.

Quality assessment of ophthalmic questionnaires: review and recommendations

PURPOSE

The aim of this article was to systematically review all the available ophthalmic patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments (questionnaires) that demonstrated interval measurement properties to identify the instruments with the highest psychometric quality for use in different eye diseases and conditions.

METHODS

An extensive literature review was carried out to identify all existing ophthalmic PRO instruments. Instruments were then excluded if they did not have demonstrable interval measurement properties; the remaining instruments were reviewed. The quality of the following psychometric properties was assessed: content development (initial item development process), performance of the response scale, dimensionality (whether the instrument measures a single construct), measurement precision, validity (convergent, concurrent, discriminant, and known groups), reliability (test-retest), targeting (whether the items are appropriate [e.g., difficulty level] for the population), differential item functioning (whether subgroups of people respond differently to an item), and responsiveness.

RESULTS

The search identified 48 PRO instruments that demonstrated interval measurement properties, and these were relevant to nine applications: glaucoma, dry eye, refractive errors, cataract, amblyopia and strabismus, macular diseases, adult low vision, children low vision, and others. These instruments were evaluated against the psychometric property quality criteria and were rated for quality based on the number of criteria met.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a descriptive catalog of ophthalmic PRO instruments to inform researchers and clinicians on the choice of the highest-quality PRO instrument suitable for their purpose.