Observational studyJournal of anesthesia2021
Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in patients attending the pain clinic.
Observational study in Journal of anesthesia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement characteristics of WHODAS 2.0 and WHODAS-Child: a systematic review of global psychometric studies in specific populations since 2010.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Arabic EuroQol-5D-5L among Sepsis Survivors in Saudi Arabia.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2026Article
- Convergent validity of 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) among people with neck pain.PloS one · 2025Article
- Challenging anesthesia of the patient on ketogenic diet therapy scheduled for scoliosis surgery under motor evoked potentials monitoring: a case report.Journal of anesthesia · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn the cohort of patients attending pain clinic, the primary goal has been shifting from pain reduction to improving activities of daily living and functional status. The 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is one of the useful tools for assessment of functional status across all psychiatric and medical diseases; however, its feasibility, reliability, and validity have not been assessed in these patients. Thus, in this study, we evaluated the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 in patients attending the pain clinic at our university hospital.
methodsThis is a prospective observational study including the patients aged 50 years or older who were attending the pain clinic at Nara Medical University between April 2019 and May 2019. Patient-related outcomes including functional status and activities of daily living were assessed with the 12-item WHODAS 2.0, EuroQol-5 dimension 5 levels, and the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology Index.
resultsThe response rate was 99.7%. The 12-item WHODAS2.0 had a floor effect but no ceiling effect and its Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.909. The correlation coefficients between the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 score and the EuroQol-5 dimension 5 levels and the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology Index were -0.66 and -0.67, respectively.
conclusionsThe 12-item WHODAS 2.0 is a useful measurement tool to assess disability of pain patients with high reliability and validity.
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.