Advanced search
Publication Cover
Disability and Rehabilitation Volume 43, 2021 - Issue 6
Submit an article Journal homepage
2,122
Views
31
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Reviews

Psychometric properties of 12-item self-administered World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) among general population and people with non-acute physical causes of disability – systematic review

Mikhail Saltycheva Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, FinlandCorrespondence[email protected]
,
Niina Katajapuub Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland
,
Esa Bärlundc Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland
&
Katri Laimia Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Pages 789-794 | Received 20 Feb 2019, Accepted 10 Jul 2019, Published online: 23 Jul 2019

References

  • Üstün TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, et al. Developing the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88:815–823.
  • World Health Organisation. WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 WHODAS 2.0, Psychometric Qualities: WHO. 2014 [cited 2015 Oct 16]. Available from: www.who.int/classifications/icf/whodasii/en/index2.html.
  • Federici S, Bracalenti M, Meloni F, et al. World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39:2347–2380.
  • Kimber M, Rehm J, Ferro MA. Measurement invariance of the WHODAS 2.0 in a population-based sample of youth. PloS One. 2015;10:e0142385.
  • Smedema SM, Ruiz D, Mohr MJ. Psychometric validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0-twelve-item version in persons with spinal cord injuries. Rehabil Res Pol Educ. 2017;31:7–20.
  • Katajapuu N, Laimi K, Heinonen A, et al. Floor and ceiling effects of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 among patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res. 2019;42:190.
  • Tazaki M, Yamaguchi T, Yatsunami M, et al. Measuring functional health among the elderly: development of the Japanese version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014;37:48–53.
  • Galli T, Mirata P, Foglia E, et al. A comparison between WHODAS 2.0 and Modified Barthel Index: which tool is more suitable for assessing the disability and the recovery rate in orthopedic rehabilitation? Clinicoecon Outcomes Res: CEOR. 2018;10:301–307.
  • Silva AG, Cerqueira M, Raquel Santos A, et al. Inter-rater reliability, standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 and four performance tests in institutionalized ambulatory older adults. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41(3):366–373.
  • Smedema SM, Yaghmaian RA, Ruiz D, et al. Psychometric validation of the world health organization disability assessment schedule 2.0-12-item version in persons with fibromyalgia syndrome. J Rehabil. 2016;82:28–35.
  • Schiavolin S, Ferroli P, Acerbi F, et al. Disability in Italian neurosurgical patients: validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014;37:267–270.
  • Gaskin CJ, Lambert SD, Bowe SJ, et al. Why sample selection matters in exploratory factor analysis: implications for the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:40.
  • Marom BS, Carel RS, Sharabi M, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) for Hebrew-speaking subjects with and without hand injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39:1155–1161.
  • Saltychev M, Bärlund E, Mattie R, et al. A study of the psychometric properties of 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a large population of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31:262–272.
  • Saltychev M, Mattie R, McCormick Z, et al. Confirmatory factor analysis of 12-Item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31:702–709.
  • Tarvonen-Schröder S, Kaljonen A, Laimi K. Utility of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule and the World Health Organization minimal generic set of domains of functioning and health in spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med. 2019;51:40–46.
  • Xenouli G, Xenoulis K, Sarafis P, et al. Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS II) in Greek and its added value to the Short Form 36 (SF-36) in a sample of people with or without disabilities. Disabil Health J. 2016;9:518–523.
  • Moreira A, Alvarelhão J, Silva AG, et al. Validation of a Portuguese version of WHODAS 2.0 - 12 items in people aged 55 or more. Revista Portuguesa de Saude Publica. 2015;33:179–182.
  • Ravaud JF, Delcey M, Yelnik A. Construct validity of the functional independence measure (FIM): questioning the unidimensionality of the scale and the “value” of FIM scores. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1999;31:31–41.
  • Brown G, Irving E, Keegan P. An introduction to educational assessment, measurement and evaluation, 2nd ed. Rosedale, North Shore, New Zealand: Pearson Education; 2008.
  • Multon KD. Test–retest reliability 2012 [cited 2019 Jun 24]. In: Encyclopedia of research design [Internet]. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE [cited 2019 Jun 24]; [2–5]. Available from: https://methods.sagepub.com/base/download/ReferenceEntry/encyc-of-research-design/n457.xml

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.