IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0232232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The development of the Screening of Visual Complaints questionnaire for patients with neurodegenerative disorders: Evaluation of psychometric features in a community sample

Author

Listed:
  • Famke Huizinga
  • Joost Heutink
  • Gera A de Haan
  • Iris van der Lijn
  • Fleur E van der Feen
  • Anne C L Vrijling
  • Bart J M Melis-Dankers
  • Stefanie M de Vries
  • Oliver Tucha
  • Janneke Koerts

Abstract

Background and objectives: Patients with neurodegenerative disorders often experience impairments in visual function. In research and clinical care, visual problems are primarily understood as objective visual impairments. Subjective complaints, referring to complaints from a patient’s perspective, receive less attention, while they are of utmost clinical importance to guide assessment and rehabilitation. A 21-item Screening of Visual Complaints questionnaire (SVC) was developed for the assessment of subjective visual complaints in patients with neurodegenerative disorders. This prospective study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SVC in a large community sample. Methods: A stratified convenience sample of 1,461 healthy Dutch participants (18–95 years) without severe self-reported neurological, ophthalmological or psychiatric conditions completed the SVC, Cerebral Visual Complaints questionnaire (CVC-q), National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire–25 (NEI-VFQ-25), Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-A (BRIEF-A), Questionnaire for Experiences of Attention Deficits (Fragebogen erlebter Defizite der Aufmerkzamkeit; FEDA), Depression Anxiety Stress Scale–21 (DASS-21) and the Structured Inventory for Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) online. After two weeks, 66 participants completed the SVC again. We evaluated the factor structure, internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, and test-retest reliability of the SVC. Results: The sample was split in two subsamples to perform exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. In the first subsample, the exploratory factor analysis extracted three factors from the SVC: diminished visual perception, altered visual perception and ocular discomfort. The confirmatory factor analysis showed this model to be valid in the second subsample. The SVC showed satisfactory convergent validity (NEI-VFQ-25: r = -0.71; CVC-q: r = 0.84) and divergent validity (SIMS: r = 0.26; BRIEF-A: r = 0.29; FEDA: r = 0.40; DASS-21: r = 0.34) and good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.82). Conclusions: The SVC is a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of subjective visual complaints in a community sample and appears promising for clinical use in patients with neurodegenerative disorders.

Suggested Citation

  • Famke Huizinga & Joost Heutink & Gera A de Haan & Iris van der Lijn & Fleur E van der Feen & Anne C L Vrijling & Bart J M Melis-Dankers & Stefanie M de Vries & Oliver Tucha & Janneke Koerts, 2020. "The development of the Screening of Visual Complaints questionnaire for patients with neurodegenerative disorders: Evaluation of psychometric features in a community sample," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0232232
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232232
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232232&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0232232?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:plo:pone00:0232232. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.