ArticleRevista de saude publica2019
WHODAS 2.0-BO: normative data for the assessment of disability in older adults.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 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, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Functioning and Disability Based on WHODAS 2.0 and Related Factors Among People Aged 80 and Over Hospitalized in a Geriatric Ward in Southeastern Poland.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Relationship between preoperative disability and postoperative major outcomes in elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Validation of the Brazilian Version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) for Women After Breast Cancer Surgery.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2025Article
- Protocol for an aged cohort study to create a single indicator that expresses the trajectory of intrinsic capacity over the years and its relation to functional abilities.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Exploring the relationship between temperament traits, psychological symptoms, and functional disability assessed with the WHODAS 2.0 in persons with multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Examining the Mental Health, Wellbeing, Work Participation and Engagement of Medical Laboratory Professionals in Ontario, Canada: An Exploratory Study.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Caregiver Burden and Disability in Somatoform Disorder: An Exploratory Study.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2021Article
- Comparative analysis of the health status of the population in six health zones in South Kivu: a cross-sectional population study using the WHODAS.Conflict and health · 2021Article
- Disability, Frailty and Depression in the community-dwelling older adults with Osteosarcopenia.BMC geriatrics · 2021Article
- Quality of Life and Functioning of People With Mental Disorders Who Underwent Deinstitutionalization Using Assisted Living Facilities: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in psychology · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the normative data of WHODAS 2.0-BO for older Brazilians (World Health Disability Assessment Schedule - Brazilian version for older people) and its distribution according to sex, age, health, subjective health perception, performance in a mobility test and presence of chronic diseases and depression.
methodsCross-sectional study, with 350 participants with 60 years of age or older, men and women, patients of a geriatric specialized center for medical consultations or rehabilitation. The older adults were evaluated using a semi-structured questionnaire containing demographic and clinical data (WHODAS 2.0-BO) and the geriatric depression scale (GDS), having been subsequently subjected to a mobility test (Timed Up and Go). The data were analyzed via their distribution in percentiles of the population and via analysis of variance.
resultsTwo-hundred and sixty-six (76%) participants were women, and the average age was 71.8 (DP = 6.7) years old. The average score in WHODAS 2.0-BO was 4.3 (DP = 5.2) points, the highest value found having corresponded to 33 points. The average time for the Timed Up and Go test was 10.0 (SD = 3.2) seconds. About 30% of the older adults did not report any difficulties in the tasks evaluated by WHODAS 2.0-BO and half of the sample scored up to two points.
conclusionsA score corresponding to 12 points in the 90 percentile on a scale from zero to 40 was observed, which suggests severe disability. The score in WHODAS 2.0-BO increased with the advance in age, as well as in the presence of comorbidities, negative health perception, depression, high blood pressure, visual and hearing impairment and mobility impairment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.