ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2019
Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Dutch Version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ-VL).
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding sustainable return to work during gender transition, a (mixed method) diary-based single-case study of a transgender woman: Spiegel im spiegel.International journal of transgender health · 2026Article
- Reliability and Construct Validity of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire Domains in Patients with Persistent Low Back Pain.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Reliability of a Spinal Cord Injury-Specific Extension of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ-SCI).Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Construct validity of the Danish version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ)-sensitivity and specificity of the objectively tested physical capacity items.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023Article
- Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) into Danish.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Content validity of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) for persons with spinal cord injury: A mixed methods study.Spinal cord · 2022Article
- Usability of self-reported assessment of work functioning in municipal occupational rehabilitation teams: A qualitative study.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2022Article
- Measurement Properties of the Full and Brief Version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire in Persons with Physical Disabilities.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Reliability, and Validity of a Turkish Version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ-Turkish).Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose The Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) was developed to evaluate work functioning in vocational rehabilitation, but was not yet available in Dutch. The goal of this study is twofold: a description of the cross-cultural adaptation process (part 1) of the WORQ to be used in Flanders (The Dutch speaking part of Belgium, WORQ-VL) and a presentation of the first psychometric testing of the WORQ-VL (part 2). Methods For part 1, the guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures by Beaton et al. were used to structure the cross-cultural adaptation. For part 2, a cross-sectional study was conducted in patients with musculoskeletal disorders [sample A: hand and wrist rehabilitation (n = 21) and sample B: fibromyalgia patients (n = 93)] who completed the WORQ-VL. Internal consistency and factor structure were examined in the total sample, whereas convergent and discriminant validity of the WORQ-VL were researched in sample A. Results First results on the convergent validity and discriminant validity (small sample size) and internal consistency of the WORQ-VL are promising. The exploratory factor analysis revealed seven factors which were labeled as 'cognition', 'physical', 'mood', 'activities of daily living', 'sensory', 'emotional' and 'social'. The best evidence was found for the 'physical' subscale of the WORQ-VL: strong correlations were found with the 'physical functioning' and 'role limitations-physical' subscales of the Short-Form Health Survey, respectively r = - .84 and r = - .59, p < .01. As expected, predominantly weak correlations were found with hand grip strength, kinesiophobia, hand-related aesthetics and satisfaction (ranging between r = - .38 and r = .34, p > .05). Conclusions The WORQ-VL is a user-friendly and valuable ICF-based self-report questionnaire to evaluate work functioning. Future studies are highly needed to examine the value of the WORQ within different patient populations and settings in order to examine further the added value of this self-report measure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30324226What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.