iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15097131/
The reliability and validity of McMonnies Dry Eye Index - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 May;23(4):365-71.
doi: 10.1097/00003226-200405000-00010.

The reliability and validity of McMonnies Dry Eye Index

Kelly K Nichols  1 , Jason J Nichols, G Lynn Mitchell
Affiliations

The reliability and validity of McMonnies Dry Eye Index

Kelly K Nichols et al. Cornea. 2004 May.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this report was to investigate the psychometric properties of the McMonnies questionnaire for dry eye disease.

Methods: The instrument was administered to 75 patients with dry eye disease on two occasions. Additional dry eye clinical tests, patient-reported dry eye interviews, and the NEI-VFQ-25 were completed during these examinations. Reliability (internal consistency and test-retest), validity (concurrent and discriminant), and accuracy were assessed for McMonnies Index scores.

Results: McMonnies Index showed poor internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.43) and moderate test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 0.90). The mean difference between visits was 0.49 (1-sample t test, t = 0.92, P = 0.36), and the 95% limits of agreement for test-retest reliability were -8.6 to +9.6. The instrument also showed fair concurrent validity, correlating only with the NEI-VFQ-25 pain subscale, but better discriminant validity when comparing mild and severe patients. Finally, the McMonnies Index demonstrated fair accuracy in identifying severe dry eye patients as defined by signs and symptoms (area under the ROC curve = 0.65).

Conclusions: The McMonnies Index demonstrates fair reliably and validity as a patient-reported instrument for use in patient care and clinical studies of patients with dry eye disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources