A Comparison of three different scales for rating contact lens handling
Du toit, Renee, Pritchard, Nicola, Heffernan, Sonia, Simpson, Trefford, & Fonn, Desmond (2002) A Comparison of three different scales for rating contact lens handling. Optometry and Vision Science, 79(5), pp. 313-320.
Purpose. To compare the validity, responsiveness, and reliability of three subjective rating scales applied to soft contact lens (SCL) handling.
Methods. Fifty-four adapted SCL wearers handled three different types of lenses on two occasions and rated the handling with each scale: visual analogue scales (VAS), 20-interval visual analogue scales with descriptors (VAD) and Likert rating scales with five intervals (LRS).
Results. There were significant differences between the scales (p < 0.01) and between the subjective ratings of lens handling (p < 0.001). VAS showed the least variability, exhibited the highest construct validity, were the most responsive, and were the most reliable: interclass correlations (0.63), coefficient of repeatability (27.5), and correlation between test and retest (Spearman r = 0.65, [all p < 0.05]). Higher repeatability, because of the fewer intervals of LRS, was not demonstrated and, generally, LRS was the least satisfactory scale. Handling was rated as easiest using VAD and most difficult using LRS.
Conclusions. Although all three scales can be used to provide measures of lens handling, VAS may provide a simple and repeatable tool for measuring subjective responses.
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Additional Information:||The contents of this journal can be freely accessed online via the journal's web page (see link) 12 months after publication. For more information, please refer to the journal's website or contact the author. Author contact details: email@example.com|
|Keywords:||rating scales, validity, reliability, symptoms|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > OPTOMETRY AND OPHTHALMOLOGY (111300)|
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > OPTOMETRY AND OPHTHALMOLOGY (111300) > Vision Science (111303)
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health|
Current > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2002 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins|
|Deposited On:||03 Apr 2007|
|Last Modified:||11 Aug 2011 00:08|
Repository Staff Only: item control page