backs up Capella-McDonnall (2007), who found a lower quality of life in those with sight loss due to increased weight gain, reduced exercise and in turn poorer health. The current study had some methodological shortcomings. For example, the participants were asked if they had significant sight loss. In some instances it was difficult to determine what to consider as as there were several elderly participants who had ‘significant’ poor sight but did not massively affect their lives, as well as diabetic patients who were beginning to lose their sight. To control this in future, perhaps participants could be divided based on a visual acuity test. However, this would be time-consuming and would not have been appropriate in the current study. The use of a telephone questionnaire had its benefits. For example, it allowed more detailed information to be recorded than a written questionnaire would. However, as some questions were personal, the use of a telephone questionnaire may have seemed more intrusive and some participants may have held back important information. A confounding variable that was controlled in this study was interviewer effects because the same interviewer was used throughout. Overall, the sight loss group scored significantly higher than the normal sight group. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that with sight loss will score higher than those ‘People without sight loss in problem areas in was accepted. The statistics and qualitative diabetes’ data also found negative effects of sight loss on diabetic patients in accessing information, managing diabetes and adopting a healthy lifestyle. Future research in this area may involve comparing those who have lived with a visual impairment for a long time to those who have recently acquired a visual impairment. It would be interesting to see if people are able to improve their health and wellbeing over time by learning how to access information, manage their diabetes and adopt a healthy lifestyle
backs up Capella-McDonnall (2007), who found a lower quality of life in those with sight loss due to increased weight gain, reduced exercise and in turn poorer health. The current study had some methodological shortcomings. For example, the participants were asked if they had significant sight loss. In some instances it was difficult to determine what to consider as ‘significant’ as there were several elderly participants who had poor sight but did not massively affect their lives, as well as diabetic patients who were beginning to lose their sight. To control this in future, perhaps participants could be divided based on a visual acuity test. However, this would be time-consuming and would not have been appropriate in the current study. The use of a telephone questionnaire had its benefits. For example, it allowed more detailed information to be recorded than a written questionnaire would. However, as some questions were personal, the use of a telephone questionnaire may have seemed more intrusive and some participants may have held back important information. A confounding variable that was controlled in this study was interviewer effects because the same interviewer was used throughout. Overall, the sight loss group scored significantly higher than the normal sight group. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that ‘People with sight loss will score higher than those without sight loss in problem areas in diabetes’ was accepted. The statistics and qualitative data also found negative effects of sight loss on diabetic patients in accessing information, managing diabetes and adopting a healthy lifestyle. Future research in this area may involve comparing those who have lived with a visual impairment for a long time to those who have recently acquired a visual impairment. It would be interesting to see if people are able to improve their health and wellbeing over time by learning how to access information, manage their diabetes and adopt a healthy lifestyle
Placement-Final-Report.docx