Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychometric Properties of the 12-Item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) in Adult Patients with Motor Disabilities

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To explore the psychometric properties of the Greek version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0–12 item) in adult patients suffering from motor disabilities. The questionnaire of WHODAS 2.0–12 item was officially translated and cross-culturally adapted into Greek (WHODAS 2.0–12Gr).136 adult patients with motor disabilities included in the present observational study. A reliability study was carried out to explore WHODAS 2.0–12Gr’s internal consistency (Cronbach’s a), repeatability (Pearson’s r) and test retest test-retest reliability between the WHODAS 2.0–12Gr outcomes of day-1 and day-8 [intra-class correlation coefficients with 95% confidence intervals (ICC 95%CI)], and the convergent validity (item-total correlation) of the questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to explore the construct validity of the WHODAS 2.0–12Gr, while the concurrent validity of the questionnaire was testing against the Greek Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey version 1.0 (SF-36v1.0-Gr). Reliability properties: WHODAS 2.0–12Gr Cronbach’s a was 0.814 (p < 0.001), Pearson’s r value was 0.980 (p < 0.001) and ICC (95%CI) was 0.990 (0.985–0.993) (p < 0.001). Validity properties: Pearson’s r values of item-total correlation were ranged from 0.376 to 0.736. EFA extracted a 3-factor model. Regarding concurrent validity, the significant correlations between the WHODAS 2.0–12Gr and the SF36v1.0-Gr ranged from −0.169 to −0.720. WHODAS 2.0–12Gr showed significant high to excellent reliability and significant weak to strong validity properties. Overall, it can be suggested that WHODAS 2.0–12Gr could be a reliable and valid tool for assessing patients with motor disabilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abedzadeh-Kalahroudi, M., Razi, E., Sehat, M., & Asadi-Lari, M. (2016). Psychometric properties of the world health organization disability assessment schedule II -12 item (WHODAS II) in trauma patients. Injury, 47, 1104–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2015.11.046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anagnostopoulos, F., Niakas, D., & Pappa, E. (2005). Construct validation of the Greek SF-36 health survey. Quality of Life Research: an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 14, 1959–1965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-3866-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, G., Kemp, A., Sunderland, M., Von Korff, M., & Ustun, T. B. (2009). Normative data for the 12 item WHO disability assessment schedule 2.0. PLoS One, 4, e8343. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008343.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, M., Schieir, O., Hudson, M., Steele, R., Kolahi, S., Berkson, L., Couture, F., Fitzcharles, M. A., Gagné, M., Garfield, B., Gutkowski, A., Kang, H., Kapusta, M., Ligier, S., Mathieu, J.-P., Ménard, H., Starr, M., Stein, M., & Zummer, M. (2008). The clinimetric properties of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II in early inflammatory arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 59, 382–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.23314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, K., & Latin, R. (2004). Measurements and data collection concepts. Essentials of research methods in health, physical education, exercise science, and recreation (2nd ed.). Baltimore-Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cappelleri, J. C., Jason Lundy, J., & Hays, R. D. (2014). Overview of classical test theory and item response theory for the quantitative assessment of items in developing patient-reported outcomes measures. Clinical Therapeutics, 36, 648–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.04.006.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Carlozzi, N. E., Kratz, A. L., Downing, N. R., Goodnight, S., Miner, J. A., Migliore, N., & Paulsen, J. S. (2015). Validity of the 12-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in individuals with Huntington disease (HD). Quality of Life Research: an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 24, 1963–1971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0930-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chisolm, T. H., Abrams, H. B., McArdle, R., Wilson, R. H., & Doyle, P. J. (2005). The WHO-DAS II: Psychometric properties in the measurement of functional health status in adults with acquired hearing loss. Trends in Amplification, 9, 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/108471380500900303.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chopra, P. K., Couper, J. W., & Herrman, H. (2004). The assessment of patients with long-term psychotic disorders: Application of the WHO disability assessment schedule II. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 38, 753–759. https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2004.01448.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chwastiak, L. A., & Von Korff, M. (2003). Disability in depression and back pain: Evaluation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule (WHO DAS II) in a primary care setting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56, 507–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costello, A., Osborne, J., (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7).

  • Cronbach, L. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dancey, C. P., & Reidy, J. (2007). Statistics without maths for psychology. Harlow: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dancey, C. P., & Reidy, J. (2008). Statistics without Maths for psychology: Using SPSS for windows. Harlow: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing, N. R., Kim, J.-I., Williams, J. K., Long, J. D., Mills, J. A., Paulsen, J. S., & PREDICT-HD Investigators and Coordinators of the Huntington Study Group. (2014). WHODAS 2.0 in prodromal Huntington disease: Measures of functioning in neuropsychiatric disease. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. EJHG, 22, 958–963. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2013.275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, G., & Everit, B. (1995). Clinical biostatistics: An introduction to evidence-based medicine. London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federici, S., Meloni, F., Mancini, A., Lauriola, M., & Olivetti Belardinelli, M. (2009). World Health Organisation disability assessment schedule II: Contribution to the Italian validation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 31, 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280802240498.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Federici, S., Bracalenti, M., Meloni, F., & Luciano, J. V. (2017). World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 39, 2347–2380. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1223177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, J., Jarvis, P., & Chevannes, M. (2002). Practical statistics for nursing and health care. Sussex: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garin, O., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Almansa, J., Nieto, M., Chatterji, S., Vilagut, G., Alonso, J., Cieza, A., Svetskova, O., Burger, H., Racca, V., Francescutti, C., Vieta, E., Kostanjsek, N., Raggi, A., Leonardi, M., Ferrer, M., & MHADIE consortium. (2010). Validation of the “World Health Organization disability assessment schedule, WHODAS-2” in patients with chronic diseases. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8, 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskin, C. J., Lambert, S. D., Bowe, S. J., & Orellana, L. (2017). Why sample selection matters in exploratory factor analysis: Implications for the 12-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 17, 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0309-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gliem, J.A., Gliem, R.R., 2003. Calculating, interpreting, and reporting cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for likert-type scales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, D. R., Parsons, N., Mohtadi, N. G. H., Safran, M. R., & Multicenter Arthroscopy of the Hip Outcomes Research Network. (2012). A short version of the international hip outcome tool (iHOT-12) for use in routine clinical practice. Arthroscopy., 28, 611–616; quiz 616–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2012.02.027.

  • Guilera, G., Gómez-Benito, J., Pino, O., Rojo, J. E., Cuesta, M. J., Martínez-Arán, A., Safont, G., Tabarés-Seisdedos, R., Vieta, E., Bernardo, M., Crespo-Facorro, B., Franco, M., & Rejas, J. (2012). Utility of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 138, 240–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2012.03.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guilera, G., Gómez-Benito, J., Pino, Ó., Rojo, E., Vieta, E., Cuesta, M. J., Purdon, S. E., Bernardo, M., Crespo-Facorro, B., Franco, M., Martínez-Arán, A., Safont, G., Tabarés-Seisdedos, R., Rejas, J., & Spanish Working Group in Cognitive Function. (2015). Disability in bipolar I disorder: The 36-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Journal of Affective Disorders, 174, 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.12.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Bombardier, C., & Tugwell, P. X. (1986). Measuring disease-specific quality of life in clinical trials. CMAJ., 134, 889–895.

  • Habtamu, K., Alem, A., Medhin, G., Fekadu, A., Dewey, M., Prince, M., & Hanlon, C. (2017). Validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule in people with severe mental disorders in rural Ethiopia. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 15, 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0647-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, M., Steele, R., Taillefer, S., Baron, M., & Research, C. S. (2008). Quality of life in systemic sclerosis: Psychometric properties of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 59, 270–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.23343.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koumpouros, Y., Papageorgiou, E., Sakellari, E., Prapas, X., Perifanou, D., & Lagiou, A. (2018). Adaptation and psychometric properties evaluation of the Greek version of WHODAS 2.0. Pilot application in Greek elderly population. Health Services & Outcomes Research Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-017-0176-x.

  • Kutlay, S., Küçükdeveci, A. A., Elhan, A. H., Oztuna, D., Koç, N., & Tennant, A. (2011). Validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II (WHODAS-II) in patients with osteoarthritis. Rheumatology International, 31, 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-009-1306-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luciano, J. V., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Fernández, A., Serrano-Blanco, A., Roca, M., & Haro, J. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the twelve item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II (WHO-DAS II) in Spanish primary care patients with a first major depressive episode. Journal of Affective Disorders, 121, 52–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2009.05.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Magistrale, G., Pisani, V., Argento, O., Incerti, C. C., Bozzali, M., Cadavid, D., Caltagirone, C., Medori, R., DeLuca, J., & Nocentini, U. (2015). Validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II (WHODAS-II) in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler., 21, 448–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458514543732.

  • Marom, B. S., Carel, R. S., Sharabi, M., & Ratzon, N. Z. (2017). Cross-cultural adaptation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) for Hebrew-speaking subjects with and without hand injury. Disability and Rehabilitation, 39, 1155–1161. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1189606.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayrink, J., Souza, R. T., Silveira, C., Guida, J. P., Costa, M. L., Parpinelli, M. A., Pacagnella, R. C., Ferreira, E. C., Sousa, M. H., Say, L., Chou, D., Filippi, V., Barreix, M., Barbour, K., von Dadelszen, P., Cecatti, J. G., & Brazilian Cohort on Severe Maternal Morbidity (COMMAG) study group and the WHO Maternal Morbidity Working Group (MMWG). (2018). Reference ranges of the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) score and diagnostic validity of its 12-item version in identifying altered functioning in healthy postpartum women. Int J Gynaecol Obstet., 141(Suppl 1), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12466.

  • McKibbin, C., Patterson, T. L., & Jeste, D. V. (2004). Assessing disability in older patients with schizophrenia: Results from the WHODAS-II. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192, 405–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meesters, J. J. L., Verhoef, J., Liem, I. S. L., Putter, H., & Vliet Vlieland, T. P. M. (2010). Validity and responsiveness of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II to assess disability in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 49, 326–333. https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/kep369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moen, V. P., Drageset, J., Eide, G. E., Klokkerud, M., & Gjesdal, S. (2017). Validation of World Health Organization assessment schedule 2.0 in specialized somatic rehabilitation services in Norway. Quality of Life Research: an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 26, 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1384-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappa, E., Kontodimopoulos, N., & Niakas, D. (2005). Validating and norming of the Greek SF-36 health survey. Quality of Life Research: an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 14, 1433–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (2000). Foundations of clinical Research: Applications to practice. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pösl, M., Cieza, A., & Stucki, G. (2007). Psychometric properties of the WHODASII in rehabilitation patients. Quality of Life Research: an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 16, 1521–1531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9259-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltychev, M., Mattie, R., McCormick, Z., & Laimi, K. (2017). Confirmatory factor analysis of 12-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule in patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Clinical Rehabilitation, 31, 702–709. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215516652930.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schiavolin, S., Ferroli, P., Acerbi, F., Brock, S., Broggi, M., Cusin, A., Schiariti, M., Visintini, S., Quintas, R., Leonardi, M., & Raggi, A. (2014). Disability in Italian neurosurgical patients: Validity of the 12-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule. Int J Rehabil Res., 37, 267–270. https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000064.

  • Schlote, A., Richter, M., Wunderlich, M. T., Poppendick, U., Möller, C., & Wallesch, C. W. (2008). Use of the WHODAS II with stroke patients and their relatives: Reliability and inter-rater-reliability. Rehabil., 47, 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-985168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, C., Coleta, I., Silva, A. G., Amaro, A., Alvarelhão, J., Queirós, A., & Rocha, N. (2013). Adaptation and validation of WHODAS 2.0 in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Revista de Saúde Pública, 47, 752–758. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-8910.2013047004374.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silveira, C., Souza, R. T., Costa, M. L., Parpinelli, M. A., Pacagnella, R. C., Ferreira, E. C., Mayrink, J., Guida, J. P., Sousa, M. H., Say, L., Chou, D., Filippi, V., Barreix, M., Barbour, K., Firoz, T., von Dadelszen, P., Cecatti, J. G., & Brazilian Cohort on Severe Maternal Morbidity (COMMAG) study group and the WHO Maternal Morbidity Working Group (MMWG). (2018). Validation of the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) 12-item tool against the 36-item version for measuring functioning and disability associated with pregnancy and history of severe maternal morbidity. Int J Gynaecol Obstet., 141(Suppl 1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12465.

  • Smedema, S. M., Yaghmaian, R. A., Ruiz, D., Muller, V., Umucu, E., & Chan, F. (2016). Psychometric validation of the world health organization disability assessment schedule 2.0-12-item version in persons with fibromyalgia syndrome. Journal of Rehabilitation, 82, 28–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snell, D. L., Iverson, G. L., Panenka, W. J., & Silverberg, N. D. (2017). Preliminary validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 for mild traumatic brain injury. Journal of Neurotrauma, 34, 3256–3261. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2017.5234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th edition). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarvonen-Schröder, S., Kaljonen, A., & Laimi, K. (2018a). Disability in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis compared with traumatic brain injury using the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 and the international classification of functioning minimal generic set. Int J Rehabil Res., 41, 224–229. https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000292.

  • Tarvonen-Schröder, S., Tenovuo, O., Kaljonen, A., & Laimi, K. (2018b). Comparing disability between traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury using the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 and the WHO minimal generic data set covering functioning and health. Clinical Rehabilitation, 32, 1676–1683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215518785945.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tarvonen-Schröder, S., Hurme, S., & Laimi, K. (2019a). The World Health Organization disability assessment schedule (WHODAS 2.0) and the WHO minimal generic set of domains of functioning and health versus conventional instruments in subacute stroke. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 51, 675–682. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2583.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tarvonen-Schröder, S., Kaljonen, A., & Laimi, K. (2019b). Utility of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule and the World Health Organization minimal generic set of domains of functioning and health in spinal cord injury. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 51, 40–46. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tarvonen-Schröder, S., Kaljonen, A., & Laimi, K. (2019c). Comparing functioning in spinal cord injury and in chronic spinal pain with two ICF-based instruments: WHODAS 2.0 and the WHO minimal generic data set covering functioning and health. Clinical Rehabilitation, 33, 1241–1251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215519839104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tazaki, M., Yamaguchi, T., Yatsunami, M., & Nakane, Y. (2014). Measuring functional health among the elderly: Development of the Japanese version of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II. Int J Rehabil Res., 37, 48–53. https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000032.

  • Thomas, J. R., Nelson, J. K., & Silverman, S. J. (2018). Research methods in physical activity. Champaign: Human kinetics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trochim, W., (2007). The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Retrieved December 26, 2019, from ResearchGate website: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/243783609_The_Research_Methods_Knowledge_Base

  • Ustün, T. B., Chatterji, S., Kostanjsek, N., Rehm, J., Kennedy, C., Epping-Jordan, J., Saxena, S., von Korff, M., Pull, C., & WHO/NIH Joint Project. (2010). Developing the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 88, 815–823. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.09.067231.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • van Tubergen, A., Landewé, R., Heuft-Dorenbosch, L., Spoorenberg, A., van der Heijde, D., van der Tempel, H., & van der Linden, S. (2003). Assessment of disability with the World Health Organisation disability assessment schedule II in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 62, 140–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Korff, M., Katon, W., Rutter, C., Ludman, E., Simon, G., Lin, E., & Bush, T. (2003). Effect on disability outcomes of a depression relapse prevention program. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 938–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-ltem short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ware, J. E., Snow, K. K., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., & New England Medical Center Hospital, Health Institute. (1993). SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston: Health Institute, New England Medical Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO | WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) [WWW Document]. (n.d.). WHO. URL http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/more_whodas/en/. Accessed 26 April 2019.

  • WHO global disability action plan 2014-2021. GENEVA: WHO. [WWW Document]. (2015). WHO. URL http://www.who.int/disabilities/actionplan/en/. Accessed 26 April 2019.

  • Wolf, A. C., Tate, R. L., Lannin, N. A., Middleton, J., Lane-Brown, A., & Cameron, I. D. (2012). The World Health Organization disability assessment scale, WHODAS II: Reliability and validity in the measurement of activity and participation in a spinal cord injury population. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 44, 747–755. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (Ed.). (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2013). How to use the ICF: A practical manual for using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Exposure draft for comment. WHO, GENEVA.

  • World Medical Association. (2013). World medical association declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310, 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xenouli, G., Xenoulis, K., Sarafis, P., Niakas, D., & Alexopoulos, E. C. (2016). Validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule (WHO-DAS II) in Greek and its added value to the short form 36 (SF-36) in a sample of people with or without disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 9, 518–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2016.01.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Younus, M. I., Wang, D.-M., Yu, F.-F., Fang, H., & Guo, X. (2017). Reliability and validity of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 in patients with Kashin-Beck disease. Rheumatology International, 37, 1567–1573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-017-3723-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Neuromuscular and Cardiovascular Study of Motion, Physiotherapy Department, University of West Attica, 28 Ag. Spyridonos, 12243, Athens, Greece

    Marianna Papadopoulou, Sophia Stasi, Daphne Bakalidou & George Papathanasiou

  2. Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of West Attica, 28 Ag. Spyridonos, 12243, Athens, Greece

    Effie Papageorgiou

  3. Department of Physical Therapy, University of West Attica, 28 Ag. Spyridonos, 12243, Athens, Greece

    Aristi Tsokani & Theodora Bratsi

Authors
  1. Marianna Papadopoulou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sophia Stasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daphne Bakalidou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Effie Papageorgiou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aristi Tsokani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Theodora Bratsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. George Papathanasiou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marianna Papadopoulou.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (include name of committee + reference number) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Papadopoulou, M., Stasi, S., Bakalidou, D. et al. Psychometric Properties of the 12-Item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) in Adult Patients with Motor Disabilities. J Dev Phys Disabil 32, 801–819 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-019-09721-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-019-09721-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation