Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 – item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses
•To formulate Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0–36 item, and to test its validity and reliability.•The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in Chinese version WHODAS 2.0 were 0.73–0.99, and 0.8–089.•The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76) and the concurrent validity was excellence.•The study divi...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Research in developmental disabilities 2014-11, Vol.35 (11), p.2812-2820 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2820 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 11 |
| container_start_page | 2812 |
| container_title | Research in developmental disabilities |
| container_volume | 35 |
| creator | Chiu, Tzu-Ying Yen, Chia-Feng Chou, Cheng-Hsiu Lin, Jin-Ding Hwang, Ai-Wen Liao, Hua-Fang Chi, Wen-Chou |
| description | •To formulate Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0–36 item, and to test its validity and reliability.•The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in Chinese version WHODAS 2.0 were 0.73–0.99, and 0.8–089.•The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76) and the concurrent validity was excellence.•The study divided into 7 factors and explained total variance was 67.26% in exploratory factor analysis.•The Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0 was a valid and reliable instrument for function and disability measurement.
World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) provided a standardized method for measuring the health and disability and the traditional Chinese version has not been developed.
To describe the process of developing the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 36-item version and to evaluate the concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of this instrument.
The study was conducted in two phases. Phase I was the process of translation of WHODAS 2.0 36-item version. Phase II was a cross-sectional study. The participants were 307 adults who were tested the validity and reliability of draft traditional Chinese version.
The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in the WHODAS 2.0 traditional Chinese version were 0.73–0.99 and 0.8–089, respectively. The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76), and the concurrent validity was excellent in comparison with the WHOQOL-BREF (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.009 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1560097300</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0891422214002790</els_id><sourcerecordid>1560097300</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-bcdae5cb4524f6edd3236c085c7d4b627598f99536d0eb31931acfe238e8558b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1uEzEYhi0EoqFwARbIy3Yxg3_G84PYRAklSJWyaKFLy2N_Qxx5PMGeBIUVd-AiPRMnwUNalsgLS5-f95HtF6HXlOSU0PLtNg_WmJwRWuSkyglpnqAZrSuecV41T9GM1A3NCsbYGXoR45YQWqX1HJ0xQZqCiHKG7pdwADfsevAjHjo8BmXsaAevHF5srIcI-AAhpsl0fDcEZ_AKlBs3eB2-Km9_qAnHSxtVa50dj3geI8T413ijN2D2DjDLCeYl_v3zF7Yj9PjibrVezm-m-SW2Ht8q-135d_iLctZMEuUNDuDso1SlGx2T9yV61ikX4dXDfo4-X324Xayy6_XHT4v5daa5KMes1UaB0G0hWNGVYAxnvNSkFroyRVuySjR11zSCl4ZAy2nDqdIdMF5DLUTd8nN0cfLuwvBtD3GUvY0anFMehn2UVJTpwytOSELZCdVhiDFAJ3fB9iocJSVyakpu5dSUnJqSpJIpmEJvHvz7tgfzL_JYTQLenwBIrzxYCDJqC16DsQH0KM1g_-f_AwW8po0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1560097300</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 – item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Chiu, Tzu-Ying ; Yen, Chia-Feng ; Chou, Cheng-Hsiu ; Lin, Jin-Ding ; Hwang, Ai-Wen ; Liao, Hua-Fang ; Chi, Wen-Chou</creator><creatorcontrib>Chiu, Tzu-Ying ; Yen, Chia-Feng ; Chou, Cheng-Hsiu ; Lin, Jin-Ding ; Hwang, Ai-Wen ; Liao, Hua-Fang ; Chi, Wen-Chou</creatorcontrib><description>•To formulate Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0–36 item, and to test its validity and reliability.•The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in Chinese version WHODAS 2.0 were 0.73–0.99, and 0.8–089.•The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76) and the concurrent validity was excellence.•The study divided into 7 factors and explained total variance was 67.26% in exploratory factor analysis.•The Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0 was a valid and reliable instrument for function and disability measurement.
World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) provided a standardized method for measuring the health and disability and the traditional Chinese version has not been developed.
To describe the process of developing the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 36-item version and to evaluate the concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of this instrument.
The study was conducted in two phases. Phase I was the process of translation of WHODAS 2.0 36-item version. Phase II was a cross-sectional study. The participants were 307 adults who were tested the validity and reliability of draft traditional Chinese version.
The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in the WHODAS 2.0 traditional Chinese version were 0.73–0.99 and 0.8–089, respectively. The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76), and the concurrent validity was excellent in comparison with the WHOQOL-BREF (p<0.5). The construct validity, the model was explained total variance was 67.26% by the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) illustrated the traditional Chinese version was good to assess disability. There was a valid and reliable measurement scales for evaluating functioning and disability status.
For disability eligibility system of Taiwan government to measure the disability, the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 provided valuable evidence to design the assessment instrument.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0891-4222</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-3379</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.009</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25094056</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Activities of Daily Living ; Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Developmental Disabilities ; Disability Evaluation ; Disability identification ; Female ; Hearing Loss ; Humans ; ICF ; Intellectual Disability ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Reproducibility of Results ; Severity of Illness Index ; Taiwan ; Traditional chinese version ; Translations ; Validity and reliability ; Vision Disorders ; WHODAS 2.0 ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Research in developmental disabilities, 2014-11, Vol.35 (11), p.2812-2820</ispartof><rights>2014 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-bcdae5cb4524f6edd3236c085c7d4b627598f99536d0eb31931acfe238e8558b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-bcdae5cb4524f6edd3236c085c7d4b627598f99536d0eb31931acfe238e8558b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.009$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27922,27923,45993</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25094056$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chiu, Tzu-Ying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yen, Chia-Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chou, Cheng-Hsiu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Jin-Ding</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hwang, Ai-Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liao, Hua-Fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chi, Wen-Chou</creatorcontrib><title>Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 – item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses</title><title>Research in developmental disabilities</title><addtitle>Res Dev Disabil</addtitle><description>•To formulate Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0–36 item, and to test its validity and reliability.•The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in Chinese version WHODAS 2.0 were 0.73–0.99, and 0.8–089.•The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76) and the concurrent validity was excellence.•The study divided into 7 factors and explained total variance was 67.26% in exploratory factor analysis.•The Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0 was a valid and reliable instrument for function and disability measurement.
World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) provided a standardized method for measuring the health and disability and the traditional Chinese version has not been developed.
To describe the process of developing the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 36-item version and to evaluate the concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of this instrument.
The study was conducted in two phases. Phase I was the process of translation of WHODAS 2.0 36-item version. Phase II was a cross-sectional study. The participants were 307 adults who were tested the validity and reliability of draft traditional Chinese version.
The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in the WHODAS 2.0 traditional Chinese version were 0.73–0.99 and 0.8–089, respectively. The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76), and the concurrent validity was excellent in comparison with the WHOQOL-BREF (p<0.5). The construct validity, the model was explained total variance was 67.26% by the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) illustrated the traditional Chinese version was good to assess disability. There was a valid and reliable measurement scales for evaluating functioning and disability status.
For disability eligibility system of Taiwan government to measure the disability, the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 provided valuable evidence to design the assessment instrument.</description><subject>Activities of Daily Living</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Developmental Disabilities</subject><subject>Disability Evaluation</subject><subject>Disability identification</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hearing Loss</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>ICF</subject><subject>Intellectual Disability</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Taiwan</subject><subject>Traditional chinese version</subject><subject>Translations</subject><subject>Validity and reliability</subject><subject>Vision Disorders</subject><subject>WHODAS 2.0</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0891-4222</issn><issn>1873-3379</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1uEzEYhi0EoqFwARbIy3Yxg3_G84PYRAklSJWyaKFLy2N_Qxx5PMGeBIUVd-AiPRMnwUNalsgLS5-f95HtF6HXlOSU0PLtNg_WmJwRWuSkyglpnqAZrSuecV41T9GM1A3NCsbYGXoR45YQWqX1HJ0xQZqCiHKG7pdwADfsevAjHjo8BmXsaAevHF5srIcI-AAhpsl0fDcEZ_AKlBs3eB2-Km9_qAnHSxtVa50dj3geI8T413ijN2D2DjDLCeYl_v3zF7Yj9PjibrVezm-m-SW2Ht8q-135d_iLctZMEuUNDuDso1SlGx2T9yV61ikX4dXDfo4-X324Xayy6_XHT4v5daa5KMes1UaB0G0hWNGVYAxnvNSkFroyRVuySjR11zSCl4ZAy2nDqdIdMF5DLUTd8nN0cfLuwvBtD3GUvY0anFMehn2UVJTpwytOSELZCdVhiDFAJ3fB9iocJSVyakpu5dSUnJqSpJIpmEJvHvz7tgfzL_JYTQLenwBIrzxYCDJqC16DsQH0KM1g_-f_AwW8po0</recordid><startdate>20141101</startdate><enddate>20141101</enddate><creator>Chiu, Tzu-Ying</creator><creator>Yen, Chia-Feng</creator><creator>Chou, Cheng-Hsiu</creator><creator>Lin, Jin-Ding</creator><creator>Hwang, Ai-Wen</creator><creator>Liao, Hua-Fang</creator><creator>Chi, Wen-Chou</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141101</creationdate><title>Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 – item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses</title><author>Chiu, Tzu-Ying ; Yen, Chia-Feng ; Chou, Cheng-Hsiu ; Lin, Jin-Ding ; Hwang, Ai-Wen ; Liao, Hua-Fang ; Chi, Wen-Chou</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-bcdae5cb4524f6edd3236c085c7d4b627598f99536d0eb31931acfe238e8558b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Activities of Daily Living</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Developmental Disabilities</topic><topic>Disability Evaluation</topic><topic>Disability identification</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hearing Loss</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>ICF</topic><topic>Intellectual Disability</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Taiwan</topic><topic>Traditional chinese version</topic><topic>Translations</topic><topic>Validity and reliability</topic><topic>Vision Disorders</topic><topic>WHODAS 2.0</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chiu, Tzu-Ying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yen, Chia-Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chou, Cheng-Hsiu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Jin-Ding</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hwang, Ai-Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liao, Hua-Fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chi, Wen-Chou</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Research in developmental disabilities</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chiu, Tzu-Ying</au><au>Yen, Chia-Feng</au><au>Chou, Cheng-Hsiu</au><au>Lin, Jin-Ding</au><au>Hwang, Ai-Wen</au><au>Liao, Hua-Fang</au><au>Chi, Wen-Chou</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 – item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses</atitle><jtitle>Research in developmental disabilities</jtitle><addtitle>Res Dev Disabil</addtitle><date>2014-11-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>2812</spage><epage>2820</epage><pages>2812-2820</pages><issn>0891-4222</issn><eissn>1873-3379</eissn><abstract>•To formulate Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0–36 item, and to test its validity and reliability.•The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in Chinese version WHODAS 2.0 were 0.73–0.99, and 0.8–089.•The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76) and the concurrent validity was excellence.•The study divided into 7 factors and explained total variance was 67.26% in exploratory factor analysis.•The Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0 was a valid and reliable instrument for function and disability measurement.
World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) provided a standardized method for measuring the health and disability and the traditional Chinese version has not been developed.
To describe the process of developing the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 36-item version and to evaluate the concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of this instrument.
The study was conducted in two phases. Phase I was the process of translation of WHODAS 2.0 36-item version. Phase II was a cross-sectional study. The participants were 307 adults who were tested the validity and reliability of draft traditional Chinese version.
The reliability of Cronbach's α and ICC in the WHODAS 2.0 traditional Chinese version were 0.73–0.99 and 0.8–089, respectively. The content validity was good (r=0.7–0.76), and the concurrent validity was excellent in comparison with the WHOQOL-BREF (p<0.5). The construct validity, the model was explained total variance was 67.26% by the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) illustrated the traditional Chinese version was good to assess disability. There was a valid and reliable measurement scales for evaluating functioning and disability status.
For disability eligibility system of Taiwan government to measure the disability, the traditional Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0 provided valuable evidence to design the assessment instrument.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>25094056</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.009</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0891-4222 |
| ispartof | Research in developmental disabilities, 2014-11, Vol.35 (11), p.2812-2820 |
| issn | 0891-4222 1873-3379 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1560097300 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Activities of Daily Living Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Cross-Sectional Studies Developmental Disabilities Disability Evaluation Disability identification Female Hearing Loss Humans ICF Intellectual Disability Male Middle Aged Reproducibility of Results Severity of Illness Index Taiwan Traditional chinese version Translations Validity and reliability Vision Disorders WHODAS 2.0 Young Adult |
| title | Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 – item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T17%3A33%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20of%20traditional%20Chinese%20version%20of%20World%20Health%20Organization%20Disability%20Assessment%20Schedule%202.0%2036%20%E2%80%93%20item%20(WHODAS%202.0)%20in%20Taiwan:%20Validity%20and%20reliability%20analyses&rft.jtitle=Research%20in%20developmental%20disabilities&rft.au=Chiu,%20Tzu-Ying&rft.date=2014-11-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=2812&rft.epage=2820&rft.pages=2812-2820&rft.issn=0891-4222&rft.eissn=1873-3379&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1560097300%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1560097300&rft_id=info:pmid/25094056&rft_els_id=S0891422214002790&rfr_iscdi=true |