Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38084177›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Psychometric Properties of the 12-Item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), Greek Version: A Cross-Sectional Study on Applicants of Welfare Benefits.

Georgios Theotokatos, Reuben Escorpizo, Theodore J Angelopoulos, Nikolaos K Chrysagis, Jerome Bickenbach, Aikaterini Venieri, Konstantinos Karteroliotis, Eirini Grammatopoulou, Emmanouil Skordilis

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Georgios TheotokatosPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Physical Education and Sport Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Reuben EscorpizoRehabilitation and Movement Science, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Vermont, Burlington, USA.
Theodore J AngelopoulosRehabilitation and Movement Science, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Vermont, Burlington, USA.
Nikolaos K ChrysagisPhysiotherapy, School of Health & Care Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, GRC.
Jerome BickenbachPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Swiss Paraplegic Research (Schweizer Paraplegiker Forschung), Nottwil, CHE.
Aikaterini VenieriSports Excellence, 1st Orthopedics Department, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Konstantinos KarteroliotisPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Physical Education and Sport Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Eirini GrammatopoulouPhysiotherapy, School of Health & Care Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, GRC.
Emmanouil SkordilisPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Physical Education and Sport Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Swiss Paraplegic Center · CHUniversity of Vermont · USSwiss Paraplegic Research · CHUniversity of Lucerne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) provides a framework for the biopsychosocial model of disability and was developed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is an ICF-based tool that measures health and disability at the population level or in clinical practice. The aim of the study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Greek version of the WHODAS 2.0 (12-item) administered to 10,163 adults who had applied for welfare benefits in three regions of Greece.

methodsThe WHODAS 2.0, administered by interview was the primary outcome variable. Principal axis factoring (PAF) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) assessed the data fit to the model (construct validity). The correlation between Barema disability percentage (assessed by a three-member medical committee) and WHODAS 2.0 score and the correlation between WHODAS 2.0 score and the number of comorbidities were also examined (concurrent validity). Cronbach's alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the questionnaire. Floor and ceiling effects were also examined.

resultsInternal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha=0.918). A significant association was found between Barema disability percentage and the WHODAS 2.0 score. Factor analysis showed a clear two-factor solution (PAF and CFA), while no floor or ceiling effects were evident.

conclusionThe Greek version of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 was found to be reliable and valid in a wide sample of applicants for welfare benefits.

Indexed as

biopsychosocial modeldisability evaluationicfpsychometric propertiessocial welfarewhodas 2.0

Identifiers

PMID38084177
PMCPMC10710541
OpenAlexW4388571926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.