Development and Validation of World Health Organization Assessment Schedule 2.0 for Persons with Disabilities Having Community Rehabilitation Services in Hong Kong
Choi, C. M. T.; Lee, Y. K.; Lee, H. L.; Chao, M. W. P.; Leung, S. L. A.; Lau, M. C. H.; Chan, L. S. E.
Show abstract
BackgroundWorld Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) was developed in 2010 to cover core components and constructs in ICF and assess disability. Simplified Chinese version and modified version by Taiwanese experts are not applicable for Hong Kong population. Therefore, there is a need for developing Hong Kong Chinese version of WHODAS 2.0 (WHODAS2.0 TC-HK). The aim of this study is to develop the WHODAS2.0 TC-HK and to evaluate its validity and reliability for persons with disabilities having community services. MethodsWHODAS 2.0 was translated from the original English version to Hong Kong Chinese. 177 subjects with disabilities were recruited from the 4 community rehabilitation units subsidized by the government and held at a local non-governmental organization (NGO) to complete WHODAS2.0 TC-HK, Chinese HK version of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36 TC-HK) and Hong Kong version of World Health Organization Quality of Life Abbreviated (WHOQOL-BREF TC-HK). The average age was 55.2 (SD 15.1) years, and 53.1% were women. Test-retest reliability, Internal consistency, Convergent validity, Concurrent validity and Construct validity were examined. ResultsTest-retest reliability and internal consistency of WHODAS2.0 TC-HK were moderate to good and good, respectively. In convergent and concurrent validity, WHODAS2.0 TC-HK domains were negatively and moderately correlated to SF-36 TC-HK sub-scores and WHOQOL-BREF TC-HK sub-scores. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) did not show satisfactory fit indices and the factor loadings per item were fair. ConclusionsWHODAS2.0 TC-HK is a valid and reliable instrument in accessing disability based on ICF model for clients at community rehabilitation services in Hong Kong.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the Yoruba version of Oswestry disability index 97%
- Health-related quality of life of adult COVID-19 patients following one-month illness experience since diagnosis: findings of a cross-sectional study in Bangladesh 97%
- Self-Rehabilitation Strategy for Rural Community-dwelling Stroke Survivors in a Lower-Middle Income Country: A Delphi Study 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Athletes’ access to, attitudes towards, and experiences of help-seeking for mental health: A scoping review protocol 94%
- Translation, adaptation, and measurement properties of the Muscle-Strengthening Exercise Questionnaire among university students in Indonesia 94%
- Psychosocial impact of the Covid-19 pandemic: Identification of most vulnerable populations 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A distinct symptom pattern emerges for COVID-19 Long-Haul: A nationwide study 93%
- Rapid Clinical Screening and Staging for COVID-19 Severe Outcome A Hospitalization Study in New York City 92%
- Impact of COVID-19 Outbreak on Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Healthcare Center in India - A cross sectional study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Acculturation stressors and academic adjustment among Nepalese students in South Korean higher education institutions 95%
- The experience of distress during the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-country examination on the fear of COVID-19 and the sense of loneliness 94%
- Prevalence of Mental Health Disorders among Elderly Diabetics and Associated Risk Factors in Indonesia 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Challenges to self-isolation among contacts of cases of COVID-19: a national telephone survey in Wales 94%
- Health Insurance Support on Maternal Health Care: Evidence from Survey Data in India 92%
- COVID-19 in Bangladesh: Measuring differences in individual precautionary behaviors among young adults 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.