IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1986762160-165_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lessons from the Visual Acuity Impairment Survey pilot study

Author

Listed:
  • Ederer, F.
  • Krueger, D.E.
  • Mowery, R.L.
  • Connett, J.
  • Wentworth, D.

Abstract

The Visual Acuity Impairment Survey (VAIS) pilot study was carried out in three larger metropolitan areas of the United States to determine whether it would be feasible to conduct a large two-stage survey of the prevalence of visual acuity impairment and its causes. The study was conducted in conjunction with the Health Interview Survey (HIS), performed by the National Center for Health Statistics and the Census Bureau. In the first stage, a simple vision screening test was administered to 1,868 adults in their homes by specially trained Census Bureau interviewers. All those who failed the test, and a sample of those who passed it, were invited to a local clinic for a check on the accuracy of the screen and a detailed eye examination to establish the cause of the impairment. About 89 per cent of the HIS interviewees took the vision screening test in the home and agreed to have the results released, making it possible for the clinic to invite them for an examination. The principal obstacle for the success of the feasibility study was a low rate (less than 50 per cent) of participation in the clinic examination by the target population. Such low participation would leave the survey open to a serious question about its representativeness. The methods and findings of the pilot study are presented because the lessons may be of value to those attempting similar studies in the future. Suggestions are made for methodological modifications that may enhance the chances for success.

Suggested Citation

  • Ederer, F. & Krueger, D.E. & Mowery, R.L. & Connett, J. & Wentworth, D., 1986. "Lessons from the Visual Acuity Impairment Survey pilot study," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 76(2), pages 160-165.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1986:76:2:160-165_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1986:76:2:160-165_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.