Cited by 165Psychometric Methodologies and TestingOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesHealth Education and Validation

The Impact of Vision Impairment Questionnaire: An Assessment of Its Domain Structure Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Rasch Analysis

Lamoureux, Ecosse L., Pallant, Julie F., Pesudovs, Konrad, Rees, Gwyn, Hassell, Jennifer B., Keeffe, Jill E.·2007·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess and validate the subscale structure of the 28-item Impact of Visual Impairment (IVI) Scale by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis for use as an outcome measure. METHODS: Three hundred nineteen participants completed the IVI questionnaire, and the responses then were subjected to Rasch analysis by RUMM2020 software. With the person estimates for each item, CFA was used to assess two hypothesized structures: three-and four-factor models. The subscales of the model with the best fit were then further validated by Rasch analysis. RESULTS: CFA supported a three-factor model that included items from the emotional well-being, reading and accessing information, and mobility and independence subscales. Almost all the selected goodness-of-fit statistics for the three-factor model were better than the recommended values. The factor loadings of the items on their respective domains were all statistically significant (P < 0.001) and ranged between 0.54 and 0.81. The three subscales individually fitted the Rasch model according to the item-trait interaction test (mobility and independence chi(2) [df] = 45.9 [44], P = 0.39; emotional well-being = 28.4 [32], P = 0.65; and reading and accessing information = 43.5 [36], P = 0.18). The item-fit residuals values of the three subscales were <2.5 and showed mean and standard deviations approximating 0 and 1, respectively. The internal consistency reliability of the subscales (alpha) was substantial, ranging between 0.89 and 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: An examination of the IVI dimension confirmed a three-subscale structure that displays interval measurement characteristics likely to provide a valid and reliable assessment of restriction of participation. The findings provide an opportunity for a more detailed measurement of the effects of different types of low-vision rehabilitation programs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.06-0361

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Both Cronbach's alpha coefficients (.740 for P&G and .764 for Unilever) are above .7, indicating high internal consistency and reliability.

    “Both coefficients are above .7 which means that internal consistency and reliability are high (Malhotra and Birks, 2007; Lamoureux et al ., 2007).”

    From Corporate social responsibility influences employee engagement (2018) · cites this paper as Lamoureux et al., 2007

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lamoureux, E. L., Pallant, J. F., Pesudovs, K., Rees, G., Hassell, J. B., & Keeffe, J. E.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
  • Flinders University (AU)
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Published
2007-03-01
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
1001
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
OpenAlex
W2119947320
Cited by
165
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
FWCI
15.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
visual impairment, low vision, questionnaire validation, domain structure, subscale structure, Rasch analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, emotional well-being
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Models, Statistical, Vision, Low, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Visually Impaired Persons, Persons with Visual Disabilities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review