ArticleJournal of occupational health2019
Cross-cultural validation of the work functioning impairment scale (WFun) among Japanese, English, and Chinese versions using Rasch analysis.
Article in Journal of occupational health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Construct validity and test-retest reliability of the World Mental Health Japan version of the World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire Short Version: a preliminary study.Industrial health · 2020Article
- Cross-cultural validation of the work functioning impairment scale (WFun) among Japanese, English, and Chinese versions using Rasch analysis.Journal of occupational health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe work functioning impairment scale (WFun) was developed to measure the degree of work functioning impairment in Japanese workers based on the Rasch model. Given that the number of foreign workers employed in Japan and abroad has increased in recent years, a multilingual questionnaire is becoming increasingly necessary to investigate work functioning impairment in these workers. The purpose of this study was to verify the cross-cultural validity of WFun between Japanese, Chinese, and English versions.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in two stages. First, the Chinese and English versions of WFun were created. Second, an internet survey was conducted among 1000 Japanese, 400 Chinese, and 300 Americans. Estimates and standard errors of an individual's ability and item difficulty were calculated using the Rasch model. Differential item functioning (DIF) and differential test functioning (DTF) were also examined using Rasch model analyses.
resultsThe effect size of DIF for one item in the English version exceeded 0.5 logit, indicating the presence of some DIF. In contrast, the effect sizes of DIF for all other items were below 0.5 logit, indicating that the influence of DIF was negligible. Furthermore, Rasch measurements according to the raw score for each version of WFun showed strong agreement among the three versions, with an intraclass correlation of 0.98 (95% confidence interval: 0.97-0.99), indicating the absence of DTF.
conclusionsOur findings indicate that the English, Chinese, and Japanese versions of WFun have good comparability.
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.