ArticleBMC psychiatry2021
Clinical validity of the 12-item WHODAS-2.0 in a naturalistic sample of outpatients with psychotic disorders.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 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
- Evaluation of a Digital, Self-Administered, Cognitive Test Battery in Older Adult Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery: Nonrandomized Feasibility Trial.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Five-year disability trajectories and associated factors among adults aging with HIV in the Ontario HIV Treatment Network Cohort Study.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Validation of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Measuring social environment factors of inpatients and outpatients with depression in Germany: a cross-sectional study.BMJ mental health · 2025Article
- Health and disability - a multi-group latent class analysis of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 among those with mental and physical health conditions.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- Comparison of the 12-item and 36-item versions of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 using longitudinal data from community mental health outreach service users.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2024Article
- Targeting metacognitive change mechanisms in acute inpatients with psychotic symptoms: feasibility and acceptability of a modularized group intervention.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2024Article
- Mapping the 12-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) onto the assessment of quality of life (AQoL)-4D utilities.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Prevalence and predictors of HIV-related disability among people living with HIV in Nigeria.The South African journal of physiotherapy · 2024Article
- Exploring Personal Recovery in Schizophrenia: The Role of Mentalization.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Psychometric and clinical evaluation of schizophrenia remission criteria in outpatients with psychotic disorders.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- Article
- How a point-of-care dashboard facilitates co-production of health care and health for and with individuals with psychotic disorders: a mixed-methods case study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Validation of the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-Effect Scale (GASS) in an Italian Sample of Patients with Stable Schizophrenia and Bipolar Spectrum Disorders.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Evidence for validity of the Swedish self-rated 36-item version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in patients with mental disorders: a multi-centre cross-sectional study using Rasch analysis.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS-2.0) is a self-administered instrument to assess functional impairment. It is used in the general population as well as different patient groups. However, its application to patients with psychotic disorders may be hampered by disease-specific difficulties of self-estimation. This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the short (12-item) WHODAS-2.0 in a naturalistic sample of outpatients attending a psychosis clinic in Gothenburg, Sweden.
methodsAnnual data from two outpatient clinics registered 2016-2019 were analyzed retrospectively. The assessment of the short WHODAS-2.0 was based on the first questionnaire completed by 881 patients. Confirmatory factor analysis evaluated previously validated models. Item convergent and discriminant validity as well as internal reliability were computed. Construct validity was assessed by comparing mean differences in accord with previous research regarding patients' characteristics associated with functioning such as advanced age, diagnosed comorbidities, antipsychotic treatment status, and symptom severity measured with PANSS-8 remission items.
resultsA heterogeneous sample was obtained in terms of age (range: 20-92), various living situations, and different geographic areas of birth. Most patients (75%) had been diagnosed with psychotic disorders more than 10 years ago and the majority (89%) were on antipsychotic medication. We confirmed an adjusted two-level factor model with a single second-order disability factor and six first-order factors representing the six IFC dimensions. The WHODAS-2.0 sum score measuring general disability showed good reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). Construct validity was confirmed as older patients, patients with comorbidities, and patients in assisted living had higher WHODAS-2.0 scores. Patients with no or mild psychotic symptoms had significantly lower WHODAS-2.0 sum scores than patients with more severe symptoms.
conclusionsThe findings further validate the 12-item WHODAS-2.0 in a naturalistic sample of outpatients with psychotic disorders. This study corroborates the clinical significance of the short, 12-item WHODAS-2.0 by demonstrating consistent associations between patients' age, medical comorbidities, living situation, antipsychotic treatment status, and psychotic symptom severity.
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.