Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Reliability and Validity01:29

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

In vitro optical characterization of the RayOne Galaxy spiral extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens using high-resolution Mach-Zehnder interferometry.

Biomedical optics express·2026
Same author

First Report of Circular Rainbow Glare After Femtosecond Laser-Assisted LASIK.

Journal of refractive surgery (Thorofare, N.J. : 1995)·2026
Same author

IOL power calculation in cataract surgery: closed-form sensitivities to biometric uncertainties.

Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision·2026
Same author

Evaluation of a New Algorithm-Based Approach in Subjective Refraction.

Journal of ophthalmology·2026
Same author

Psychometric Assessment of the Metamorphopsia Questionnaire in Patients with Macular Diseases Receiving Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment.

Journal of clinical medicine·2026
Same author

International consensuses and guidelines on clinical management of highly myopic cataracts: A two-round modified e-Delphi study by the Academy of Asia-Pacific Professors of Ophthalmology (AAPPO) and the Asia-Pacific Myopia Society (APMS).

Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 10, 2026

A Standardized Obstacle Course for Assessment of Visual Function in Ultra Low Vision and Artificial Vision
09:29

A Standardized Obstacle Course for Assessment of Visual Function in Ultra Low Vision and Artificial Vision

Published on: February 11, 2014

The Quality of Vision questionnaire: subscale interchangeability.

Colm McAlinden1, Eirini Skiadaresi, Damien Gatinel

  • 1School of Medicine, Flinders Medical Centre and Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. colm.mcalinden@gmail.com

Optometry and Vision Science : Official Publication of the American Academy of Optometry
|June 25, 2013
PubMed
Summary

The Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire subscales (Frequency, Severity, Bothersome) measure distinct aspects of vision quality. Therefore, all three subscales are necessary for a comprehensive assessment of subjective vision quality.

More Related Videos

Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients
12:23

Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients

Published on: April 14, 2014

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 10, 2026

A Standardized Obstacle Course for Assessment of Visual Function in Ultra Low Vision and Artificial Vision
09:29

A Standardized Obstacle Course for Assessment of Visual Function in Ultra Low Vision and Artificial Vision

Published on: February 11, 2014

Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients
12:23

Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients

Published on: April 14, 2014

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Vision Science
  • Patient-Reported Outcomes

Background:

  • Subjective quality of vision is crucial for patient satisfaction and outcomes.
  • The Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire is a widely used tool to assess vision quality.
  • The interchangeability of its subscales (Frequency, Severity, Bothersome) requires evaluation to optimize its use.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the interchangeability of the Frequency, Severity, and Bothersome subscales of the QoV questionnaire.
  • To determine if QoV subscales are predictive of each other.
  • To ascertain if all three QoV subscales are necessary for comprehensive vision quality assessment.

Main Methods:

  • Pooled data from four studies, including 1930 participants across various vision correction groups (spectacles, contact lenses, refractive surgery, cataract, intraocular lenses).
  • Employed the Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) method to assess interchangeability between QoV subscales.
  • Analyzed Frequency vs. Severity, Frequency vs. Bothersome, and Severity vs. Bothersome subscale pairs.

Main Results:

  • Wide limits of agreement (LoA) were observed between all pairs of QoV subscales.
  • Frequency vs. Severity LoA: -10.4397 to 16.1537.
  • Frequency vs. Bothersome LoA: -19.1831 to 30.1179.
  • Severity vs. Bothersome LoA: -15.9006 to 21.1213.

Conclusions:

  • The substantial LoA indicate that the Frequency, Severity, and Bothersome subscales capture distinct dimensions of subjective vision quality.
  • No single subscale can substitute for another.
  • Continued use of all three QoV subscales is recommended for a thorough evaluation of vision quality.