The Brazilian version of the work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 with 5 items (WRFQ-5) has adequate measurement properties

References

• Abma FI, Amick BC, Brouwer S, Van Der Klink JJ, Bültmann U 2012 The cross-cultural adapta-tion of the work role functioning questionnaire to Dutch. Work 43:2. 203–210. doi:10.3233/WOR-2012-1362
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Abma FI, Bjorner JB, Amick BC, Bültmann U 2019 Two valid and reliable work role functioning questionnaire short versions were developed: WRFQ 5 and WRFQ 10. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 105: 101–111. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.09.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abma FI, Van Der Klink JJ, Bültmann U 2012 The work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 (Dutch Version): Examination of its reliability, validity and responsiveness in the general working population. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 23:1. 135–147. doi:10.1007/s10926-012-9379-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almeida da Silva-Junior S, Vasconcelos A, Griep R, Rotenberg L 2011 Validade e confiabilidade do índice de capacidade para o trabalho (ICT) em trabalhadores de enfermagem [Validity and reliability of the work ability index (WAI) in nurses’ work]. Cadernos de Saúde Pública 27:6. 1077–1087. doi:10.1590/S0102-311X2011000600005
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bassi D, Santos-de-Araújo AD, Camargo PF, Dibai-Filho AV, Da-Fonseca MA, Mendes RG, Borghi-Silva A 2018 Inter and intra-rater reliability of short-term measurement of heart rate variability on rest in diabetic type 2 patients. Journal of Medical Systems 42:12. 236. doi:10.1007/s10916-018-1101-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown TA 2006 Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Durand M, Vachon B, Hong Q, Imbeau D, Amick B, Loisel P 2004 The cross-cultural adaptation of the work role functioning questionnaire in Canadian French. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 27:4. 261–268. doi:10.1097/00004356-200412000-00002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira-Valente MA, Pais-Ribeiro JL, Jensen MP 2011 Validity of four pain intensity rating scales. Pain 152:10. 2399–2404. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2011.07.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleiss JL 1999 The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gallasch CH, Alexandre NM, Esteves SC, Gomes HF, Da-Rocha EC, Baptista PC 2017 Limitations of workers diagnosed with cancer evaluated with work role functioning questionnaire-Br. Ecancermedicalscience 11: 769. doi:10.3332/ecancer.2017.769
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hong QN, Coutu MF, Berbiche D 2017 Evaluating the validity of the work role functioning questionnaire (Canadian French version) using classical test theory and item response theory. Work (Reading, Mass.) 57:4. 501–515. doi:10.3233/WOR-172585
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Melo JS, Dibai-Filho AV, Oliveira CM, Pinheiro CA, Rocha DS, Santana GN, Gomes CA, Bassi-Dibai D 2021 Self-estimated functional inability because of pain questionnaire for workers: A reliability and construct validity study. Journal of Brazilian Medical Association 67: 1622–1626.
   Google Scholar
• Melo JS, Dibai-Filho AV, Rêgo AS, Rocha DS, De-Walsh IA, De-Jesus-Tavarez RR, Gonçalves MC, Damasceno KL, De-Paula-Gomes CA, Bassi-Dibai D 2022 Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 into Brazilian Portuguese in a general population. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 20:1. 17. doi:10.1186/s12955-022-01924-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokhtarinia HR, Shahbazi A, Abma FI, Gabel CP 2021 Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 to Persian. Disability Rehabilitation 18: 5268–5276.
   Google Scholar
• Pinheiro CA, Fidelis-de-Paula-Gomes CA, Barros VS, Melo JP, Bassi-Dibai D, Dibai-Filho AV 2020 Self-estimated functional inability because of pain questionnaire for Brazilian workers with musculoskeletal pain: Face and content validity. Fisioterapia e Pesquisa 27:3. 299–305. doi:10.1590/1809-2950/19031027032020
   Google Scholar
• Prinsen CA, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, De-Vet HC, Terwee CB 2018 COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research 27:5. 1147–1157. doi:10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramada JM, Serra C, Amick BC, Abma FI, Castaño JR, Pidemunt G, Bültmann U, Delclos GL 2014 Reliability and validity of the work role functioning questionnaire (Spanish version). Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 24:4. 640–649. doi:10.1007/s10926-013-9495-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H 2003 Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research 8: 23–74.
   Google Scholar
• Takahasi HY, Fidelis-de-Paula-Gomes CA, Gabel CP, Dibai-Filho AV 2021 Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI) into Brazilian Portuguese in patients with chronic upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice 56: 102452. doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2021.102452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RW, Bouter LM, De-Vet HC 2012 Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: A scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Quality of Life Research 21:4. 651–657. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar