ArticlePloS one2023
Validation of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in individuals with schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and diabetes in Singapore.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07532551 (Assessing the Clinical and Cost Effectiveness of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Assessing the Clinical and Cost Effectiveness of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (iCBT) for Anxiety and Depression in Singapore
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Article
- Psychological distress among recently retired individuals in a resource-limited setting: the role of overall functioning and the moderating effect of perceived social support.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Validation of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Beyond symptom improvement: transdiagnostic and disorder-specific ways to assess functional and quality of life outcomes across mental disorders in adults.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2025Article
- Article
- Experienced and anticipated discrimination among people living with schizophrenia in China: a cross-sectional study.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2025Article
- Physical, Cognitive, Social, and Functional Health Correlates of Major Depressive Disorder Subtypes: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Factors associated with functional ability in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing chemoradiotherapy: a prospective longitudinal study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited evidence on the reliability and validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in an Asian patient population with mental and physical disorders. The current study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the WHODAS 2.0 among patients with schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and diabetes.
methodsA total of 1076 patients (M = 40.9 years, SD = 14.7) were recruited from the outpatient clinics of a tertiary psychiatric hospital and a primary care clinic. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability, structural validity, convergent validity, agreement, and floor and ceiling effects were examined.
resultsOur confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed that the 1-factor model fits our data. Multigroup CFA demonstrated metric and scalar invariance, indicating the scores can be compared across the four conditions. The WHODAS 2.0 scale had excellent reliability in the overall sample and good to excellent reliability across conditions. The test-retest reliability and agreement between self-administered and interviewer-administered modes were good. The WHODAS 2.0 scores had moderate to strong correlations with the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale and the Sheehan Disability Scale scores in the overall sample and across four conditions.
conclusionFindings suggest that the WHODAS 2.0 is a valid tool to measure functioning and disability in those with schizophrenia, anxiety, depression, and diabetes in an Asian patient population.
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.