Abstract
Abstract: We conducted a secondary analysis to evaluate two glare items versus a composite score from the two items in a sample of 544 patients (38% women; Mdn = 29 years old; 13% high school education or less) before and after eye surgery. The first question was from a National Eye Institute (NEI) survey and the second question included a definition and picture of glare. At baseline, 28% of participants reported glare on the NEI item versus 39% on the question with the definition and picture. There was 76% agreement between the two questions (K = .46). Three months after baseline, there was no change in the percentage of participants who reported glare on the NEI question (27%), but a significant decrease in participants reporting glare on the question with the definition and picture (38% at baseline to 25% 3 months later). A 2-item glare scale was more reliable and highly correlated with multi-item measures of halos and starbursts than the individual items. Change in the scale was more strongly associated than the items with the change in satisfaction with vision and with satisfaction with surgery. The scale may provide a better indicator of glare than either item alone.
References
(2022). Single item measures in psychological science. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 38(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000699
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
(2007). Principles of disability glare measurement: An ophthalmological perspective. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica, 85(4), 354–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0420.2006.00860.x
(2006). Restor intraocular lens implantation in cataract surgery: Quality of vision. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 32(9), 1459–1463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.04.015
(1935). Spearman-brown formula applied to ratings of personality traits. Journal of Educational Psychology, 26(7), 552–555. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054722
(1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
(1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
(2021). Vision-targeted health-related quality-of-life survey for evaluating minimally invasive glaucoma surgery. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 229, 145–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2021.03.064
(2003).
The measurement of interrater agreement . In W. A. ShewartS. S. WilksEds., Statistical methods for rates and proportions (3rd ed., pp. 598–626). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471445428(2001). Subjective photic phenomena with refractive multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 27(2), 245–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0886-3350(00)00540-x
(1991). Hospital quality trends: A short-form patient-based measure. Medical Care, 29(7), 661–668. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199107000-00006
(2003). Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute – Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument. Ophthalmology, 110(12), 2292–2301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2002.07.001
(2017). Assessment of the psychometric properties of a questionnaire assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes with Laser in situ Keratomileusis (PROWL). JAMA Ophthalmology, 135(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.4597
(2011). Comparative utility of a single-item versus multiple-item measure of self-efficacy in predicting relapse among young adults. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 41(3), 305–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2011.04.005
(2018). Development and evaluation of a measure of patient-reported symptoms of blepharitis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16(1), Article
11 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0839-5(1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
(2022). Normalizing the use of single-item measures: Validation of the single-item compendium for organizational psychology. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37(4), 639–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09813-3
(2003). Responsiveness of the National Eye Institute refractive error quality of life instrument to surgical correction of refractive error. Ophthalmology, 110(12), 2302–2309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.02.004
(1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
(2013). Development of a vision-targeted health-related quality of life item measure. Quality of Life Research, 22(9), 2477–2487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0365-1
(2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201272002
(2000). Reliability and validity of the Ocular Surface Disease Index. Archives of Ophthalmology, 118(5), 615–621. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.118.5.615
(1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245
(1999). Self-reported assessment of visual function in a population-based study: The SEE project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 40(2), 280–288.
(2007). Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity: AcrySof restor apodized diffractive versus ACRYSOF Sa60 at monofocal intraocular lenses. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 33(7), 1244–1247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.03.052
(1992). The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.
(2012). Concurrent validity of single-item measures of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization in burnout assessment. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(11), 1445–1452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2015-7
