What is the most appropriate way to analyse the WHODAS 2.0 score?

IF 0.4 Q4 REHABILITATION
S. Castro, A. Ferreira, Edgar Gomes Marques Sampaio, Camilla Medeiros Araújo, Thaissa Hamana de Macedo Dantas, D. Dantas
{"title":"What is the most appropriate way to analyse the WHODAS 2.0 score?","authors":"S. Castro, A. Ferreira, Edgar Gomes Marques Sampaio, Camilla Medeiros Araújo, Thaissa Hamana de Macedo Dantas, D. Dantas","doi":"10.3233/PPR-200448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a practical, generic and widely used tool to assess the functioning and disability in several settings and health conditions. Although the use of categorical variables is common, this choice to present data could separate persons with very close functioning profiles into different categories. PURPOSE: This study aims to compare different ways of expressing the WHODAS score and give elements for the researcher to understand and choose the most appropriate way to statistically analyse the WHODAS scores. METHODS: A methodological study with secondary data of one hundred ninety-five women. The WHODAS score was analysed in different ways and associated with sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle, and health aspects. The Poisson regression was chosen with the final WHODAS score in four variations (continuous, dichotomous, polytomous, and quartiles), and the presence of chronic disease. RESULTS: The analysis showed statistical significance in the univariate analysis for the adjustment variables and all the variations of the disability variable. The distribution analysis of the prevalence ratio and the AIC evidenced that the WHODAS score as a continuous variable had the lower AIC and statistical significance, as well as the most significant area under the ROC curve. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the use of the continuous variable is the most indicated and that the categorization of the WHODAS score should be avoided. Keywords:","PeriodicalId":38170,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Practice and Research","volume":"42 1","pages":"35-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3233/PPR-200448","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Practice and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/PPR-200448","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a practical, generic and widely used tool to assess the functioning and disability in several settings and health conditions. Although the use of categorical variables is common, this choice to present data could separate persons with very close functioning profiles into different categories. PURPOSE: This study aims to compare different ways of expressing the WHODAS score and give elements for the researcher to understand and choose the most appropriate way to statistically analyse the WHODAS scores. METHODS: A methodological study with secondary data of one hundred ninety-five women. The WHODAS score was analysed in different ways and associated with sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle, and health aspects. The Poisson regression was chosen with the final WHODAS score in four variations (continuous, dichotomous, polytomous, and quartiles), and the presence of chronic disease. RESULTS: The analysis showed statistical significance in the univariate analysis for the adjustment variables and all the variations of the disability variable. The distribution analysis of the prevalence ratio and the AIC evidenced that the WHODAS score as a continuous variable had the lower AIC and statistical significance, as well as the most significant area under the ROC curve. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the use of the continuous variable is the most indicated and that the categorization of the WHODAS score should be avoided. Keywords:
分析WHODAS 2.0评分最合适的方法是什么?
背景:世界卫生组织残疾评估表(WHODAS 2.0)是一种实用、通用和广泛使用的工具,用于评估几种环境和健康状况下的功能和残疾。虽然使用分类变量是很常见的,但这种呈现数据的选择可能会将具有非常接近的功能概况的人分成不同的类别。目的:本研究旨在比较WHODAS评分的不同表达方式,为研究者提供理解和选择最合适的WHODAS评分统计分析方式的要素。方法:对195名妇女的辅助资料进行方法学研究。WHODAS评分以不同的方式进行分析,并与社会人口特征、生活方式和健康方面相关联。选择泊松回归,将最终的WHODAS评分分为四种变化(连续、二分、多分和四分位数),并考虑是否存在慢性疾病。结果:调整变量和失能变量的单因素分析均有统计学意义。对患病率和AIC的分布分析表明,WHODAS评分作为连续变量具有较低的AIC和统计学显著性,并且在ROC曲线下的面积最显著。结论:这些结果表明,连续变量的使用是最有意义的,应避免将WHODAS评分分类。关键词:
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
Physiotherapy Practice and Research
Physiotherapy Practice and Research Health Professions-Occupational Therapy
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
×
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