The activity inventory: An adaptive visual function questionnaire
The activity inventory: An adaptive visual function questionnaire
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/opx.0b013e3181339efd
复制
发表时间：
2007-08-01
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Barnett, G. David
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Massof, Robert W.;Ahmadian, Lohrasb;Barnett, G. David
目的。活动量表 (Al) 是一种自适应视觉功能调查问卷，由嵌套在 50 个目标下的 459 个任务组成，而这些目标又嵌套在三个目标下。视障患者被要求对每个目标的重要性、至少具有一定重要性的目标的难度以及服务于具有一定重要性和一定难度的目标的任务的难度进行评级。因此，每位患者都会回答一组单独定制的问题，这些问题提供了功能历史和估计患者视觉能力所需的数据。本文的目的是检验以下假设：AI 中的所有项目组合，并通过扩展所有视觉功能问卷，测量相同的视觉能力变量。方法。连续招募的 1880 名低视力患者在首次接受低视力康复服务之前接受了 Al 治疗。该组中的 407 名患者还接受了另外两份视觉功能问卷，这些问卷选自日常生活活动量表 (ADVS)、国家眼科研究所视觉功能问卷 (NEI VFQ)、14 项视觉功能指数 (VF-14) 和视觉活动问卷 (VAQ)。对每个 VFQ 的响应、对 Al 的所有响应以及对 Al.Results 中各个项目子集的响应进行 Rasch 分析。 Al 项目和人员测量的拟合统计模式表明估计的视觉能力变量不是一维的。阅读相关和其他需要高视觉分辨率的项目的残余误差比预期的要小，而与移动相关的项目的残余误差比预期的要大。人员测量残留误差的模式无法用疾病诊断来解释。当项目被分组为代表四个视觉功能领域（阅读、移动、视觉运动、视觉信息）的子集，并且对每个领域以及所有组合项目进行单独的个人测量时，观察到视觉能力相当于第一主成分，并占方差的 79%。然而，验证性因素分析表明，视觉能力是一个至少包含两个因素的复合变量：一个因素对移动能力的影响最大，另一个对阅读能力的影响最大。这两个因素可以解释残余误差的模式。当比较 AI 中的不同项目子集以及比较不同的 VFQ 时，观察到高乘积矩和类内相关性。结论。视觉能力是一个包含两个因素的复合变量；一种对阅读功能影响最大，另一种对移动功能影响最大。 Al 和不同 VFQ 中的项目子集都测量相同的视觉能力变量。
Purpose. The Activity Inventory (Al) is an adaptive visual function questionnaire that consists of 459 Tasks nested under 50 Goals that in turn are nested under three Objectives. Visually impaired patients are asked to rate the importance of each Goal, the difficulty of Goals that have at least some importance, and the difficulty of Tasks that serve Goals that have both some importance and some difficulty. Consequently, each patient responds to an individually tailored set of questions that provides both a functional history and the data needed to estimate the patient's visual ability. The purpose of the present article is to test the hypothesis that all combinations of items in the Al, and by extension all visual function questionnaires, measure the same visual ability variable.Methods. The Al was administered to 1880 consecutively-recruited low vision patients before their first visit to the low vision rehabilitation service. Of this group, 407 were also administered two other visual function questionnaires randomly chosen from among the Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADVS), National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI VFQ), 14-item Visual Functioning Index (VF-14), and Visual Activities Questionnaire (VAQ). Rasch analyses were performed on the responses to each VFQ, on all responses to the Al and on responses to various subsets of items from the Al.Results. The pattern of fit statistics for Al item and person measures suggested that the estimated visual ability variable is not unidimensional. Reading-related and other items requiring high visual resolution had smaller residual errors than expected and mobility-related items had larger residual errors than expected. The pattern of person measure residual errors could not be explained by the disorder diagnosis. When items were grouped into subsets representing four visual function domains (reading, mobility, visual motor, visual information), and separate person measures were estimated for each domain as well as for all items combined, visual ability was observed to be equivalent to the first principal component and accounted for 79% of the variance. However, confirmatory factor analysis showed that visual ability is a composite variable with at least two factors: one upon which mobility loads most heavily and the other upon which reading loads most heavily. These two factors can account for the pattern of residual errors. High product moment and intraclass correlations were observed when comparing different subsets of items within the Al and when comparing different VFQs.Conclusions. Visual ability is a composite variable with two factors; one most heavily influences reading function and the other most heavily influences mobility function. Subsets of items within the Al and different VFQs all measure the same visual ability variable.