Evaluating the reliability and validity of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 among people with mental health conditions in seven low- and middle-income countries: analysis of secondary data.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Awoke Mihretu, Sarah Aleyan, Jessica Schmider, Charlotte Hanlon, Crick Lund, Ricardo Araya, Alicia White, Kassahun Habtamu
{"title":"Evaluating the reliability and validity of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 among people with mental health conditions in seven low- and middle-income countries: analysis of secondary data.","authors":"Awoke Mihretu, Sarah Aleyan, Jessica Schmider, Charlotte Hanlon, Crick Lund, Ricardo Araya, Alicia White, Kassahun Habtamu","doi":"10.1192/bjo.2025.10778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) has been validated across various settings and health conditions. However, few studies have evaluated the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) among individuals with mental health conditions.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 in populations with depression, anxiety and psychosis from seven LMICs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Secondary analyses were carried out using existing longitudinal data-sets in adult populations with depression, anxiety and psychosis across Brazil, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Nigeria, Peru and South Africa. Reliability, validity and responsiveness to change of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 were examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 12-item WHODAS-2.0 was acceptably one-dimensional for all data-sets at baseline, with model-fit indices ranging from moderate to excellent. Internal consistency of the measure was found to be high across settings (Cronbach's <i>α</i> = 0.83-0.97). Weak to moderate correlations with measures of symptom severity were found across all countries, except India. Moderate to strong correlations were observed with measures of functioning/quality of life across all countries, except Nigeria and Ghana.Internal responsiveness to change was large in five out of seven studies, except both Ethiopian studies. However, external responsiveness to change exhibited variability, with weak to moderate correlations between change in WHODAS 2.0 and symptom scores across all countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The 12-item WHODAS 2.0 generally showed acceptable psychometric properties across different settings and mental health conditions. However, high variability was observed in convergent validity and external responsiveness to change, which warrants further investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9038,"journal":{"name":"BJPsych Open","volume":"11 6","pages":"e231"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJPsych Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2025.10778","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) has been validated across various settings and health conditions. However, few studies have evaluated the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) among individuals with mental health conditions.

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 in populations with depression, anxiety and psychosis from seven LMICs.

Method: Secondary analyses were carried out using existing longitudinal data-sets in adult populations with depression, anxiety and psychosis across Brazil, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Nigeria, Peru and South Africa. Reliability, validity and responsiveness to change of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 were examined.

Results: The 12-item WHODAS-2.0 was acceptably one-dimensional for all data-sets at baseline, with model-fit indices ranging from moderate to excellent. Internal consistency of the measure was found to be high across settings (Cronbach's α = 0.83-0.97). Weak to moderate correlations with measures of symptom severity were found across all countries, except India. Moderate to strong correlations were observed with measures of functioning/quality of life across all countries, except Nigeria and Ghana.Internal responsiveness to change was large in five out of seven studies, except both Ethiopian studies. However, external responsiveness to change exhibited variability, with weak to moderate correlations between change in WHODAS 2.0 and symptom scores across all countries.

Conclusion: The 12-item WHODAS 2.0 generally showed acceptable psychometric properties across different settings and mental health conditions. However, high variability was observed in convergent validity and external responsiveness to change, which warrants further investigation.

在七个低收入和中等收入国家的精神健康状况患者中评估WHODAS 2.0的12个项目的信度和效度:二手数据分析。
背景:世界卫生组织残疾评估表(WHODAS 2.0)已在各种环境和健康状况下得到验证。然而,很少有研究在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)中对有精神健康状况的个人评估了WHODAS 2.0的12个项目。目的:本研究旨在评估WHODAS 2.0量表在7个中低收入国家抑郁、焦虑和精神病人群中的心理测量特性。方法:利用巴西、埃塞俄比亚、加纳、印度、尼日利亚、秘鲁和南非现有的抑郁症、焦虑症和精神病成年人群的纵向数据集进行二次分析。对WHODAS 2.0的12个条目进行信度、效度和变化响应性检验。结果:基线时所有数据集的WHODAS-2.0的12个条目均为可接受的一维,模型拟合指数从中等到优秀。测量结果的内部一致性在不同设置下都很高(Cronbach's α = 0.83-0.97)。除印度外,所有国家都发现了与症状严重程度的弱至中度相关性。除尼日利亚和加纳外,所有国家的功能/生活质量指标均观察到中度至强相关性。除了埃塞俄比亚的两项研究外,七项研究中有五项对变化的内部反应很大。然而,对变化的外部反应表现出可变性,在所有国家,WHODAS 2.0的变化与症状评分之间存在弱至中度相关性。结论:WHODAS 2.0的12个条目在不同的环境和心理健康状况下均表现出可接受的心理测量特性。然而,在收敛效度和对变化的外部反应性方面观察到高变异性,这值得进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJPsych Open
BJPsych Open Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
610
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Announcing the launch of BJPsych Open, an exciting new open access online journal for the publication of all methodologically sound research in all fields of psychiatry and disciplines related to mental health. BJPsych Open will maintain the highest scientific, peer review, and ethical standards of the BJPsych, ensure rapid publication for authors whilst sharing research with no cost to the reader in the spirit of maximising dissemination and public engagement. Cascade submission from BJPsych to BJPsych Open is a new option for authors whose first priority is rapid online publication with the prestigious BJPsych brand. Authors will also retain copyright to their works under a creative commons license.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信