• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用社区心理健康外展服务使用者的纵向数据比较世界卫生组织残疾评估量表(WHODAS)2.0 的 12 项和 36 项版本。

Comparison of the 12-item and 36-item versions of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 using longitudinal data from community mental health outreach service users.

机构信息

Department of Community Mental Health & Law, National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Neuropsychopharmacol Rep. 2024 Jun;44(2):457-463. doi: 10.1002/npr2.12426. Epub 2024 Mar 11.

DOI:10.1002/npr2.12426
PMID:38468442
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11144613/
Abstract

AIM

This study aimed to compare the 12-item and 36-item versions of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 using longitudinal data from community mental health outreach service users.

METHODS

Using data from Tokorozawa City mental health outreach service users in Japan, total and domain WHODAS-12 and WHODAS-36 scores were compared. First, we examined score-change differences by domain at the start of outreach services (T1) and 1 year later (T2) for each version. Next, we compared differences between the two versions using Pearson's correlation, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

Among 20 participants, total scores and scores of some domains (i.e., cognition, getting along, life activities, and participation) were significantly lower at T2 than at T1 on both versions (p < 0.010). WHODAS-36 scores were significantly lower at T2 than at T1 for the self-care domain (p = 0.018). Except for self-care, strong correlations were found between scores from the two versions (p < 0.001). In the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bland-Altman analysis, we found significant differences between the scores of the two versions in the mobility, self-care, and participation domains. There were no significant differences in the distribution or systematic errors between the two versions in scores for the other domains or total score.

CONCLUSION

We found strong positive correlations between WHODAS-12 and WHODAS-36 total scores with no statistical differences between them. For some domains, differences in distribution and systematic errors were found.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在使用社区心理健康外展服务使用者的纵向数据比较世界卫生组织残疾评估量表(WHODAS)2.0 的 12 项和 36 项版本。

方法

利用日本所泽市心理健康外展服务使用者的数据,比较了 WHODAS-12 和 WHODAS-36 总分和各领域的分数。首先,我们分别在服务开始时(T1)和 1 年后(T2)检查了两个版本各领域的分数变化差异。其次,我们使用 Pearson 相关系数、Wilcoxon 符号秩检验和 Bland-Altman 分析比较了两个版本之间的差异。

结果

在 20 名参与者中,两个版本的总分和一些领域(即认知、相处、生活活动和参与)的分数在 T2 时均显著低于 T1(p < 0.010)。WHODAS-36 量表的自理领域的 T2 评分显著低于 T1(p = 0.018)。除了自理,两个版本的评分之间存在很强的相关性(p < 0.001)。在 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验和 Bland-Altman 分析中,我们发现两个版本在移动、自理和参与领域的评分之间存在显著差异。在其他领域或总分的评分中,两个版本之间的分布或系统误差没有显著差异。

结论

我们发现 WHODAS-12 和 WHODAS-36 总分之间存在很强的正相关,两者之间没有统计学差异。对于一些领域,发现了分布和系统误差的差异。

相似文献

1
Comparison of the 12-item and 36-item versions of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 using longitudinal data from community mental health outreach service users.使用社区心理健康外展服务使用者的纵向数据比较世界卫生组织残疾评估量表(WHODAS)2.0 的 12 项和 36 项版本。
Neuropsychopharmacol Rep. 2024 Jun;44(2):457-463. doi: 10.1002/npr2.12426. Epub 2024 Mar 11.
2
Measuring functional health among the elderly: development of the Japanese version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II.测量老年人的功能健康:世界卫生组织残疾评定量表II日文版的编制
Int J Rehabil Res. 2014 Mar;37(1):48-53. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000032.
3
Psychometric evaluation of the WHODAS 2.0 and prevalence of disability in a Swedish general population.WHODAS 2.0 的心理测量学评估及瑞典普通人群残疾的流行率。
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023 Apr 5;7(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s41687-023-00580-0.
4
Why sample selection matters in exploratory factor analysis: implications for the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0.为什么样本选择在探索性因素分析中很重要:对世界卫生组织残疾评估量表2.0(12项)的启示
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Mar 11;17(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0309-5.
5
Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in people with severe mental disorders in rural Ethiopia.世界卫生组织残疾评定量表在埃塞俄比亚农村重症精神障碍患者中的效度验证
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Apr 5;15(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0647-3.
6
Confirmatory factor analysis of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS-2.0) within the clubhouse model of psychosocial rehabilitation for serious mental illness.12 项世界卫生组织残疾评定量表 2.0(WHODAS-2.0)在心理社会康复会所模式下用于严重精神疾病的验证性因子分析。
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2024 Sep;47(3):229-239. doi: 10.1037/prj0000594. Epub 2023 Dec 14.
7
A comparison of patient ratings and staff ratings of disability using the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule in individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders who are forensic psychiatric inpatients.使用世界卫生组织残疾评估量表对精神病谱系障碍的法医精神病住院患者的残疾进行患者自评和员工评估的比较。
Crim Behav Ment Health. 2024 Aug;34(4):347-359. doi: 10.1002/cbm.2344. Epub 2024 Jun 2.
8
Characterization of Disability in Canadians with Mental Disorders Using an Abbreviated Version of a DSM-5 Emerging Measure: The 12-Item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0.使用《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版(DSM-5)一项新出现的简版量表对加拿大精神障碍患者的残疾情况进行特征描述:12项世界卫生组织残疾评定量表(WHODAS)2.0。
Can J Psychiatry. 2016 Apr;61(4):227-35. doi: 10.1177/0706743716632514. Epub 2016 Feb 16.
9
Classical test theory and item response theory produced differences on estimation of reliable clinical index in World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0.经典测量理论和项目反应理论在世界卫生组织残疾评估量表 2.0 中可靠临床指标的估计上产生了差异。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Nov;103:51-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.07.002. Epub 2018 Aug 6.
10
[Validity and Reliability of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in Turkish Psychiatry Patients and Healthy Controls].[世界卫生组织残疾评定量表2.0(WHODAS 2.0)在土耳其精神病患者和健康对照人群中的效度与信度]
Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2018 Winter;29(4):248-257.

引用本文的文献

1
Service use patterns in community mental health outreach: A sequence analysis of the first 12-month longitudinal data.社区心理健康外展服务使用模式:对前12个月纵向数据的序列分析
PLoS One. 2025 Sep 11;20(9):e0332437. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0332437. eCollection 2025.
2
Psychometric properties of Japanese version of the Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL).日本版生活质量恢复量表(ReQoL)的心理测量学特性。
BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Mar 20;25(1):265. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-06622-9.
3
Headache Phenotype and the Psychosocial Burden of Cluster Headaches: An Analysis of Patients Prior to Hospitalization.头痛表型与丛集性头痛的社会心理负担:住院前患者分析
Pain Ther. 2025 Apr;14(2):753-767. doi: 10.1007/s40122-025-00715-9. Epub 2025 Feb 24.
4
10-year outcome trajectories of people with mental illness and their families who receive services from multidisciplinary case management and outreach teams: protocol of a multisite longitudinal study.多学科个案管理和外展团队服务的精神疾病患者及其家属的 10 年结局轨迹:一项多中心纵向研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2024 Aug 31;14(8):e085532. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085532.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessment by proxy of the SF-36 and WHO-DAS 2.0. A systematic review.代理评估 SF-36 和 WHO-DAS 2.0。系统评价。
J Rehabil Med. 2023 Jun 30;55:jrm4493. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v55.4493.
2
Measuring disability in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease: the WHODAS 2.0-36, WHODAS 2.0-32, and WHODAS 2.0-12.测量肌萎缩侧索硬化/运动神经元病患者的残疾程度:WHODAS 2.0-36、WHODAS 2.0-32 和 WHODAS 2.0-12。
Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener. 2023 Feb;24(1-2):63-70. doi: 10.1080/21678421.2022.2102926. Epub 2022 Jul 23.
3
Developing an International Standard Set of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Psychotic Disorders.制定一套针对精神障碍的国际患者报告结局测量标准集。
Psychiatr Serv. 2022 Mar 1;73(3):249-258. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.202000888. Epub 2021 Aug 9.
4
Validity and Reliability of the Japanese Version of the 12-item Self-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in Patients with Schizophrenia.中文版 12 项自我报告世界卫生组织残疾评定量表(WHODAS 2.0)在精神分裂症患者中的有效性和可靠性。
Acta Med Okayama. 2021 Jun;75(3):315-322. doi: 10.18926/AMO/62226.
5
The WHODAS-2 and Community Psychiatry.世界卫生组织残疾评定量表-2与社区精神病学。
Can J Psychiatry. 2021 Dec;66(12):1094-1095. doi: 10.1177/07067437211017868. Epub 2021 May 19.
6
Psychometric evaluation of the Swedish self-rated 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 for use in psychiatric populations - using classical test theory.使用经典测量理论对用于精神科人群的瑞典自评 36 项 WHODAS 2.0 版本的心理计量学评估
Nord J Psychiatry. 2021 Oct;75(7):494-501. doi: 10.1080/08039488.2021.1897162. Epub 2021 May 9.
7
Clinical validity of the 12-item WHODAS-2.0 in a naturalistic sample of outpatients with psychotic disorders.12 项 WHODAS-2.0 在精神病门诊患者自然样本中的临床有效性。
BMC Psychiatry. 2021 Mar 10;21(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s12888-021-03101-9.
8
Psychometric properties of 12-item self-administered World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) among general population and people with non-acute physical causes of disability - systematic review.12 项自我管理世界卫生组织残疾评估表 2.0(WHODAS 2.0)在一般人群和非急性身体原因残疾人群中的心理测量特性 - 系统评价。
Disabil Rehabil. 2021 Mar;43(6):789-794. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1643416. Epub 2019 Jul 23.
9
Validation of the 36-item and 12-item self-report World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS-II) in individuals with autism spectrum disorder.验证 36 项和 12 项自我报告世界卫生组织残疾评估表第二版(WHODAS-II)在自闭症谱系障碍个体中的适用性。
Autism Res. 2019 Jul;12(7):1101-1111. doi: 10.1002/aur.2115. Epub 2019 Apr 29.
10
Validation of the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) 12-item tool against the 36-item version for measuring functioning and disability associated with pregnancy and history of severe maternal morbidity.验证世界卫生组织残疾评估表(WHODAS 2.0)12 项工具与 36 项工具在衡量与妊娠和严重孕产妇发病率相关的功能和残疾方面的有效性。
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018 May;141 Suppl 1(Suppl Suppl 1):39-47. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12465.