OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) for measuring functioning and disability in accordance with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. WHODAS 2.0 is a standard metric for ensuring scientific comparability across different populations. METHODS: A series of studies was carried out globally. Over 65,000 respondents drawn from the general population and from specific patient populations were interviewed by trained interviewers who applied the WHODAS 2.0 (with 36 items in its full version and 12 items in a shortened version). FINDINGS: The WHODAS 2.0 was found to have high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, α: 0.86), a stable factor structure; high test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.98); good concurrent validity in patient classification when compared with other recognized disability measurement instruments; conformity to Rasch scaling properties across populations, and good responsiveness (i.e. sensitivity to change). Effect sizes ranged from 0.44 to 1.38 for different health interventions targeting various health conditions. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS 2.0 meets the need for a robust instrument that can be easily administered to measure the impact of health conditions, monitor the effectiveness of interventions and estimate the burden of both mental and physical disorders across different populations.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) for measuring functioning and disability in accordance with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. WHODAS 2.0 is a standard metric for ensuring scientific comparability across different populations. METHODS: A series of studies was carried out globally. Over 65,000 respondents drawn from the general population and from specific patient populations were interviewed by trained interviewers who applied the WHODAS 2.0 (with 36 items in its full version and 12 items in a shortened version). FINDINGS: The WHODAS 2.0 was found to have high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, α: 0.86), a stable factor structure; high test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.98); good concurrent validity in patient classification when compared with other recognized disability measurement instruments; conformity to Rasch scaling properties across populations, and good responsiveness (i.e. sensitivity to change). Effect sizes ranged from 0.44 to 1.38 for different health interventions targeting various health conditions. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS 2.0 meets the need for a robust instrument that can be easily administered to measure the impact of health conditions, monitor the effectiveness of interventions and estimate the burden of both mental and physical disorders across different populations.
Authors: M A Buist-Bouwman; J Ormel; R De Graaf; G Vilagut; J Alonso; E Van Sonderen; W A M Vollebergh Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2008 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Renata M Sousa; Cleusa P Ferri; Daisy Acosta; Emiliano Albanese; Mariella Guerra; Yueqin Huang; K S Jacob; A T Jotheeswaran; Juan J Llibre Rodriguez; Guillermina Rodriguez Pichardo; Marina Calvo Rodriguez; Aquiles Salas; Ana Luisa Sosa; Joseph Williams; Tirso Zuniga; Martin Prince Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-11-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: J C Menant; F Weber; J Lo; D L Sturnieks; J C Close; P S Sachdev; H Brodaty; S R Lord Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2016-07-09 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Jennifer M Jones; Karin Olson; Pamela Catton; Charles N Catton; Neil E Fleshner; Monika K Krzyzanowska; David R McCready; Rebecca K S Wong; Haiyan Jiang; Doris Howell Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Elizabeth A Hahn; Nancy R Downing; Julie C Stout; Jane S Paulsen; Becky Ready; Siera Goodnight; Jin-Shei Lai; Jennifer A Miner; Noelle E Carlozzi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-12-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: N E Carlozzi; S G Schilling; J-S Lai; J S Paulsen; E A Hahn; J S Perlmutter; C A Ross; N R Downing; A L Kratz; M K McCormack; M A Nance; K A Quaid; J C Stout; R C Gershon; R E Ready; J A Miner; S K Barton; S L Perlman; S M Rao; S Frank; I Shoulson; H Marin; M D Geschwind; P Dayalu; S M Goodnight; D Cella Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-08-13 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Matthew J Miller; Megan A Morris; Dawn M Magnusson; Kelly Putnam; Paul F Cook; Margaret L Schenkman; Cory L Christiansen Journal: PM R Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 2.298