OBJECTIVES:  The NEI VFQ-25, a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of vision-related quality of life, is often administered by telephone or face-to-face interview, given the difficulties of self-administration in patients with low vision. To evaluate whether available evidence informs the equivalence of these two modes of administering the NEI VFQ-25, we conducted a literature review to identify: 1) studies on equivalence of telephone and face-to-face administration of any PRO instrument, and 2) studies with mixed-mode NEI VFQ-25 administration. METHODS:  A systematic literature review was conducted for each objective. Medline was searched using keywords for English articles published after 1980 for objective 1 (equivalence review) and after 1997 for objective 2 (research review). Bibliographies of published articles were also reviewed. Studies on food frequency, mental illness, drug/alcohol use, or sexual behavior were excluded. RESULTS:  The equivalence review identified 11 publications comparing face-to-face and telephone PRO interviews, all of which supported equivalence of the two modes. However, no equivalence study comparing the two modes of administration specifically for the NEI VFQ-25 was identified. In 8 out of the 9 studies in adults using other PROs, equivalence was assessed by comparing mean scores of the two interview modes administered successively to the same population. In 7 of these 9 studies, interviews were conducted within 2 weeks. The research review identified 6 instances in which NEI VFQ-25 data were obtained by a mix of face-to-face and telephone interviews. These 6 studies (3 interventional, 3 observational) were conducted across conditions including age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema, and retinal vein occlusion. CONCLUSIONS:  The literature review shows that it is common to use mixed-mode telephone and face-to-face interviews for administering the NEI VFQ-25. Equivalence studies of face-to-face and telephone interviews of PROs across a wide range of instruments, diseases, and ages support this method of combined analysis.