Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32388787›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2020

Proxy reliability of the 12-item world health organization disability assessment schedule II among adult patients with mental disorders.

Wei Zhou, Qian Liu, Yu Yu, Shuiyuan Xiao, Lizhang Chen, Kaveh Khoshnood, Shimin Zheng

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Wei ZhouHospital Administration Institute, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China. weizhou86@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1497-3095
Qian LiuXiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Yu YuDivision of Prevention and Community Research & The Consultation Center, Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Shuiyuan XiaoXiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Lizhang ChenXiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Kaveh KhoshnoodDepartment of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.
Shimin ZhengDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, College of Public Health, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, USA.

Funding

Research Ethics Training and Curriculum Development Program with ChinaR25TW007700 · FIC · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI KHOSHNOOD, KAVEH · 2011 to 2021
$2.5M
FIC NIH HHS R25 TW007700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite the wide usage of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS 2.0) in psychiatry research and clinical practice, there was limited knowledge on its proxy reliability among people with mental disorders. This paper aimed to compare the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 responses of adult patients with mental disorders to their family caregivers.

methodsIn this study, 205 pairs of patients with mental disorders and primary family caregivers were consecutively recruited from one inpatient mental health department in a large hospital in China. All participants completed the 12-item version WHODAS 2.0 to assess patients' functioning in the 30 days prior to the hospitalization. Measurement invariance, including configural, metric and scalar invariance, was tested across patient and proxy groups, using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. Agreement between patients and proxies was examined by paired Wilcoxon tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Subgroup analyses for proxy reliability were conducted within strata of proxy kinship and patient psychiatric diagnosis.

resultsThe 12-item WHODAS 2.0 achieved configural, metric and partial scalar invariance across patient and proxy groups. Unsatisfactory consistency was found for most items (ICC < 0.75, P < 0.05), especially for items on Cognition, Getting along, Life activities, and Participation in society (ICC < 0.4, P < 0.05). Spouses agreed with patients more often than parents (ICC ≥ 0.4, P < 0.05). The paired Wilcoxon tests found that impairment of patients with psychotic disorders tended to be overestimated by proxies while proxies tended to underestimate impairment of patients with mood disorders.

conclusionOur study reveals inconsistency between self and proxy reports in the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 among adult patients with mental disorders. When proxy reports is needed, spouses are preferred than parents. We should be aware of proxies' impairment overestimation among patients with psychotic disorders and underestimation among patients with mood disorders.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychotic DisordersQuality of LifeWorld Health OrganizationAdult patients with mental disordersFamily caregiversProxy reliabilityThe 12-item WHODAS 2.0

Identifiers

PMID32388787

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.