ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2021
An item analysis according to the Rasch model of the German 12-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0).
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 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, 10 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
- Psychometric validation of a cognition and social participation bolt-on for the EQ-5D-5L in SARS-CoV-2 infected German healthcare workers.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Dimensionality and invariance of ADL, IADL, BI-M2/WG-SS, and GALI in large surveys in France (2008-2014) and implications for measuring disability in epidemiology.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- WHODAS measurement properties for women with dysmenorrhea.Health and quality of life outcomes · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe World Health Organization Disability Assessent Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) assesses disability in individuals irrespective of their health condition. Previous studies validated the usefulness of the WHODAS 2.0 using classical test theory. This study is the first investigating the psychometric properties of the 12-items WHODAS 2.0 in patients with cancer using item analysis according to the Rasch model.
methodsIn total, 350 cancer patients participated in the study. Rasch analysis of the 12-items version of the WHODAS 2.0 was conducted and included testing unidimensionality, local independence, and testing for differential item functioning (DIF) with regard to age, gender, type of cancer, presence of metastases, psycho-oncological support, and duration of disease.
resultsAfter accounting for local dependence, which was mainly found across items of the same WHODAS domain, satisfactory overall fit to the Rasch model was established (χ
conclusionOverall, the analysis results according to the Rasch model support the use of the WHODAS 2.0 12-item version as a measure of disability in cancer patients.
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.