Utility of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II in schizophrenia

Guilera, Georgina; Gómez-Benito, Juana; Pino, Óscar; Rojo, J. Emilio; Cuesta, Manuel J.; Martínez‐Arán, Anabel; Safont, Gemma; Tabarés‐Seisdedos, Rafael; Vieta, Eduard; Bernardo, Miquel; Crespo‐Facorro, Benedicto; Franco, Manuel; Rejas, Javier

doi:10.1016/j.schres.2012.03.031

Cited by 65 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These values are in line with findings from many other previous studies conducted in samples of people with a range of different health conditions [5, 7, 15, 16], but higher than a few other studies [11]. …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The WHODAS 2.0 has been validated in several high income countries, including Germany and Portugal [11, 12], and middle income countries such as China [13]. The psychometric properties of WHODAS have been evaluated in a number of studies, including population samples and in people with a range of health conditions, including severe mental disorders (SMD) [3, 5, 11, 12, 14–16]. However, to our knowledge, there are no published studies on the validation of the WHODAS among people with SMD in a rural African setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in people with severe mental disorders in rural Ethiopia

Habtamu

Alem

Medhin

et al. 2017

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-2.0) has been adapted and validated in several cultures, but data on performance in the African context are lacking. The aim of the study was to evaluate the validity and psychometric properties of the WHODAS-2.0 among people with severe mental disorders (SMD) and their caregivers in a rural African setting.MethodsThe content validity of the 36 item WHODAS was assessed using free listing and pile sorting in 36 community members. Cognitive interviewing was conducted with 20 people with SMD and 20 caregivers to assess comprehensibility. Convergent validity and sensitivity to change were evaluated in a facility-based cohort study of new or acutely relapsed cases of people with SMD (n = 150) and their caregivers (n = 150) consecutively recruited from a psychiatric clinic. A repeat assessment was conducted in a sub-sample (n = 84) after 6 weeks. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate construct validity in people with SMD (n = 250) and their caregivers (n = 250).ResultsInternal consistency of the items of the overall scale and each domain ranged from very good (alpha = 0.82) to excellent (alpha = 0.98). Scores on the WHODAS-2.0 correlated highly with a locally developed measure of functioning (r = 0.88) and moderately with clinical symptom severity (r = 0.52). The WHODAS- 2.0 was sensitive to treatment changes (effect size = 0.50). As hypothesized, the six sub-scales loaded highly onto the general disability factor and each item loaded significantly onto their respective domains. The factor loadings of each item in the one factor model of the brief version of WHODAS (12 item) were also high. For both 12- and 36-item scales the goodness of fit indices, were close to, but outside of, recommended ranges. The caregiver data of both the 36 and 12 item versions had similar psychometric properties, but higher mean values and better responsiveness to change.ConclusionsOur study showed that both the 12 and 36 item versions of the WHODAS 2.0 have acceptable validity and psychometric properties and can be used as a cross-cultural measure; however, careful and rigorous adaptation is required for rural African settings.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0647-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in people with severe mental disorders in rural Ethiopia

Habtamu

Alem

Medhin

et al. 2017

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, according to Nunally's (1987) suggestion for the interpretation of Cronbach's alpha coefficients (to consider them high as from .70), the internal consistency indexes of the total scale were adequate for patients with mental disorders with or without psychotic symptoms who participated in this study. These findings are consistent with those obtained in other countries where very high rates of internal consistency of WHODAS have been obtained in patients with schizophrenia (Guilera et al, 2012) and depression (Chwastiak & Von Korff, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

WHODAS and the evaluation of disability among people with mental disorders with and without psychotic symptoms

Hernández-Orduña

Robles-García

Martínez-López

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Valid and feasible measures to properly assess the most impaired areas of functioning in various groups of patients with mental disorders would allow the development and evaluation of interventions designed to modify the specific environmental barriers that contribute to patients´ disability. Objective. This article seeks to evaluate the internal consistency and construct and convergent validity of the Spanish version of the World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Schedule WHODAS 2.0, as well as its relationship with sociodemographic variables and symptomatic severity in Mexican patients with and without psychotic symptoms. Method. The WHODAS 2.0 and the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale SOFAS were administered to 153 patients with any of the following diagnoses: affective disorders, anxiety disorders, stress-related disorders, and psychotic disorders. Results. The WHODAS 2.0 showed high internal consistency in patients with psychotic symptoms (Cronbach's alpha = .92) and without psychotic symptoms (Cronbach's alpha = .89). Nevertheless, only in patients without psychotic symptoms, was a significant negative correlation between WHODAS (disability) and SOFAS (functioning) total scores observed, together with significant differences in WHODAS scores between those with mild and severe symptomatology. Discussion and conclusion. The WHODAS 2.0 is an adequate measure of disability in patients without psychotic symptoms. It could be used as a complementary measure of disability in those with psychotic symptoms. Further studies are required to determine other psychometric properties of the WHODAS 2.0, particularly those related to temporal stability and sensitivity to change.

show abstract

“…More work is needed to further examine these discrepancies. Similarly, support for reliability is also consistent with other previously published studies that demonstrate that Cronbach’s alphas were good to excellent for the 36-item version [1; 4–6; 9–12; 14; 15; 17; 18; 21; 52]and good for the 12-item version [2]. Our examination of the reliability of the individual subscales indicated that, despite only 2 items per subscale, there was excellent internal consistency reliability for self-reported ADLs (i.e., Self-Care), good reliability for cognition and activities (i.e., Cognition and Life Activities), and adequate reliability for social engagement (i.e., Getting Along and Participation).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Support for the 6-factor structure of the 12-item version of the WHODAS 2.0 is consistent with other studies examining the 36-item version [1; 3; 4; 6; 21; 52]. For the two studies that examined the factor-structure of the 12-item version of the WHODAS 2.0, only one was able to confirm the factor structure [25]; the other found support for a one-factor solution (for 6 of 7 developing countries) [24].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in individuals with Huntington disease (HD)

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The reliability and construct validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) was examined in individuals with Huntington disease (HD). Methods We examined factor structure (confirmatory factor analysis), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha), floor and ceiling effects, convergent validity (Pearson correlations), and known-groups validity (multivariate analysis). Results Results of a confirmatory factor analysis replicated the six factor latent model that reflects the six separate scales within the WHODAS 2.0 (understanding and communicating; getting around; self-care; getting along with others, life activities; participation). Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.94, suggesting good internal consistency reliability. The WHODAS demonstrated a ceiling effect for 19.5% of participants; there were no floor effects. There was evidence for convergent validity; the WHODAS demonstrated moderate significant correlations with other general measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL; i.e., RAND-12, EQ5D). Multivariate analyses indicated that late-stage HD participants indicated poorer HRQOL than both early-stage HD and prodromal HD participants for all HRQOL measures. Conclusions Findings provide support for both the reliability and validity of the WHODAS 2.0 in individuals with HD.

show abstract

Utility of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II in schizophrenia

Cited by 65 publications

References 44 publications

Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in people with severe mental disorders in rural Ethiopia

Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in people with severe mental disorders in rural Ethiopia

WHODAS and the evaluation of disability among people with mental disorders with and without psychotic symptoms

Validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in individuals with Huntington disease (HD)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About