Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30324226›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2019

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Dutch Version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ-VL).

Katrien Vermeulen, Maxim Woestyn, Kristine Oostra, Sybille Geers, Kristien Ryngaert, Kimberley Van de Velde, Filip Descheemaeker, Stijn De Baets, Dominique Van de Velde

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Katrien VermeulenDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. katrien.vermeulen@uzgent.be.ORCID 0000-0001-5099-9367
Maxim WoestynDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Kristine OostraDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Sybille GeersDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Kristien RyngaertDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Kimberley Van de VeldeDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Filip DescheemaekerDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Stijn De BaetsDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6856-5305
Dominique Van de VeldeDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6982-1075

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Work Capacity EvaluationAdultCross-Sectional StudiesCultural CompetencyCultureFemaleHumansMaleMusculoskeletal DiseasesNetherlandsOccupational TherapyPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesPsychometricsReturn to workVocational rehabilitationWork Rehabilitation QuestionnaireWORQ

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.