ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
Validation of the World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 for children with mental disorders in specialized health-care services.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. 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.
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
3 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
- Association Between Trauma, Impulsivity, and Functioning in Suicide Attempters.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- McLean OCD Institute for Children and Adolescents: Overview, Rationale, and Description of Symptomatology and Functional Impairment.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Mental disorders are highly prevalent among children, yet access to timely and effective treatment remains limited. Untreated or poorly managed mental disorders in children are associated with significant functional deterioration and long-term consequences. The validation of reliable assessment tools is crucial for identifying functional impairments and guiding interventions in this population. This study aimed to assess the utility and psychometric properties of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in evaluating functional impairment among children and adolescents receiving specialized mental health care in Mexican psychiatric hospitals. Method: A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted from January 2018 to February 2020 in two psychiatric public hospitals in Mexico. The Spanish version of the WHODAS 2.0 was adapted for the pediatric population, and its psychometric properties were evaluated among 390 children and adolescents receiving psychiatric care. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and tests of internal consistency and validity. Results: The WHODAS 2.0 demonstrated high internal consistency (α = .92) and convergent validity, with significant correlations observed between WHODAS scores and clinical variables. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a six-dimensional structure, with gender-specific differences identified in functional impairment patterns. Discussion: The study provides robust evidence supporting the utility and psychometric properties of the WHODAS 2.0 for assessing functional impairment in children and adolescents with mental disorders in Mexican psychiatric hospitals. These findings have implications for clinical practice, policy-making, and future research aimed at improving outcomes for this vulnerable 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.