Awoke Mihretu, Sarah Aleyan, Jessica Schmider, Charlotte Hanlon, Crick Lund, Ricardo Araya, Alicia White, Kassahun Habtamu
{"title":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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}
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.
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.
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.