How is WHODAS scoring calculated?
Scoring. There are two basic options for computing the summary scores for the WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions. Simple: the scores assigned to each of the items – “none” (0), “mild” (1) “moderate” (2), “severe” (3) and “extreme” (4) – are summed.
What is The WHODAS Disability Assessment Schedule?
The World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a practical, generic assessment instrument that can measure health and disability at population level or in clinical practice (World Health Organisation (WHO), 2010). This is the self-report version of the WHODAS 2.0 for use by individuals 18 years of age and over.
How reliable is WHODAS?
WHODAS 2.0 produces domain-specific scores for six different functioning domains – cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along, life activities (household and work) and participation. Test-retest studies of the 36-item scale in countries across the world found it to be highly reliable.
What does WHODAS stand for?
In place of the GAF, the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule version 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0; [1]) was added as a measure for further study.
How do you interpret Whodas scores?
The average scores are comparable to the WHODAS 5-point scale, which allows the clinician to think of the individual's disability in terms of none (0-0.49), mild (0.5-1.49), moderate (1.5-2.49), severe (2.5-3.49), or extreme (3.5-4).
What is the purpose of the Whodas assessment?
The adult self-administered version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a 36-item measure that assesses disability in adults age 18 years and older.
What is a high Whodas score?
13 The total score for WHODAS ranges from 0–100, where a high score indicates major living limitations. 16 The shorter WHODAS‐12 consists of two questions from each domain (called sentinel key questions) of the full 36‐item version of the WHODAS.
How are Whodas scores calculated?
It takes into account multiple levels of difficulty for each WHODAS 2.0 item. It takes the coding for each item response as "none", "mild", "moderate", "severe" and "extreme" separately, and then uses an algorithm to determine the summary score by differentially weighting the items and the levels of severity.
What does a Whodas score of 50 mean?
A score of 0 represents total impairment, and a score of 100 would represent normal functioning. A GAF score below 50 represents serious to severe social impairment.
Who can administer a Whodas?
health professionalsThe WHODAS 2.0 is a free assessment tool developed by the World Health Organisation. It can be administered by health professionals who have read the training manual (this module is a summary of that manual).
What is the Whodas scale?
Scoring. There are two basic options for computing the summary scores for the WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions. Simple: the scores assigned to each of the items – “none” (0), “mild” (1) “moderate” (2), “severe” (3) and “extreme” (4) – are summed.
What is a global assessment function score for psychiatric conditions?
The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) is a scoring system that mental health professionals use to assess how well an individual is functioning in their daily lives. This scale was once used to measure the impact of psychiatric illness on a person's life and daily functional skills and abilities.
What does a GAF score of 60 mean?
60 – 51: Moderate symptoms, or moderate difficulty in social, occupational, or school functioning. 50 – 41: Serious symptoms, or any serious impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning.
Who measures quality of life?
The WHOQOL-BREF is a 26-item instrument consisting of four domains: physical health (7 items), psychological health (6 items), social relationships (3 items), and environmental health (8 items); it also contains QOL and general health items.
What is disability who?
Disability results from the interaction between individuals with a health condition, such as cerebral palsy, Down syndrome and depression, with personal and environmental factors including negative attitudes, inaccessible transportation and public buildings, and limited social support.
Is GAF still used?
In addition, the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF), the previously endorsed numerical rating scale used for assessment of functioning and reported on Axis V, has been eliminated.
How to license WHODAS 2.0?
To license WHODAS 2.0, such as for including WHODAS 2.0 in an electronic records or data capture system or reproducing it in any way, please go to Licensing WHO Classifications to submit a request.
When was WHODAS 2.0 published?
The original Disability Schedule WHO/DAS published by WHO in 1988 – was an instrument developed to assess functioning, mainly in psychiatric inpatients. WHODAS 2.0 superseded WHODAS II and is an altogether different instrument that is grounded in the conceptual framework of the ICF.
What is the IRT scoring method?
Complex: The more complex method of scoring is called “item-response-theory” (IRT) based scoring. It takes into account multiple levels of difficulty for each WHODAS 2.0 item. It takes the coding for each item response as “none”, “mild”, “moderate”, “severe” and “extreme” separately, and then uses an algorithm to determine the summary score by differentially weighting the items and the levels of severity. The SPSS algorithm is available from WHO. The scoring has three steps:
What is simple scoring?
Simple: the scores assigned to each of the items – “none” (0), “mild” (1) “moderate” (2), “severe” (3) and “extreme” (4) – are summed. This method is referred to as simple scoring because the scores from each of the items are simply added up without recoding or collapsing of response categories; thus, there is no weighting of individual items. This approach is practical to use as a hand-scoring approach, and maybe the method of choice in busy clinical settings or in paper-pencil interview situations. As a result, the simple sum of the scores of the items across all domains constitutes a statistic that is sufficient to describe the degree of functional limitations.
What is a generic assessment instrument?
A generic assessment instrument for health and disability. Used across all diseases, including mental, neurological and addictive disorders. Short, simple and easy to administer (5 to 20 minutes) Applicable in both clinical and general population settings. A tool to produce standardized disability levels and profiles.
What is the basis for selecting all items?
All items were selected on the basis of item–response theory (i.e. the application of mathematical models to data gathered from questionnaires and tests).
How many countries are there in the Cross-Cultural Application Study?
Cross-cultural application study spanning 19 countries around the world. The items were selected after exploring how health status is assessed in different cultures through a process that involved linguistic analysis of health-related terms, interviews with key informants and focus group discussions, as well as qualitative methods (e.g. pile sorting and concept mapping).
What is WHODAS 2.0?
Abstract. WHODAS 2.0 is the standard measure of disability promoted by World Health Organization whereas Clinical Global Impression (CGI) is a widely used scale for determining severity of mental illness. Although a close relationship between these two scales would be expected, there are no relevant studies on the topic.
How accurate is WHODAS 2.0?
We found that WHODAS 2.0 is a useful scale for measuring severity of illness scored by clinicians with ICG, and so WHODAS 2.0 correctly classifies 59.0% of the patients. Compared with the traditional correction of WHODAS 2.0, FLDA improves accuracy in near 15% with respect to the traditional method. However, as it is shown in the classification map figure, the classification is far from being perfect and there are overlapped areas and some patients can be catalogued by WHODAS 2.0 with a low level of illness severity whereas clinicians classified them with higher scores and vice versa. Finally, FLDA shows that there are certain items of WHODAS more important for clinicians when considering severity of illness, specifically items regarding economic repercussion of illness and regarding a detriment of sexual life.
What is FLDA in computer science?
In the pattern recognition community, Fisher Linear Discriminant Analysis (FLDA) [ 18#N#C. M. Bishop, Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, Springer, 2006. View at: MathSciNet#N#See in References#N#] is one of the most used analytical tools to transform the raw data into a lower dimensional subspace by maximizing a class separation criterion. Concisely, if the data contain observations belonging to possible classes, this technique finds linear projections in such a way that the class separation is maximized and the intraclass variation minimized. Before applying the FLDA algorithm, a principal component analysis keeping 95% of the variance was applied to remove noise [ 23#N#P. N. Belhumeur, J. P. Hespanha, and D. J. Kriegman, “Eigenfaces vs. Fisherfaces: Recognition using class specific linear projection,” in Computer Vision — ECCV '96, vol. 1064 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 43–58, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar#N#See in References#N#]. Blasco-Fontecilla et al. [ 24#N#H. Blasco-Fontecilla, D. Delgado-Gomez, T. Legido-Gil, J. de Leon, M. M. Perez-Rodriguez, and E. Baca-Garcia, “Can the Holmes-Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS) Be Used as a Suicide Risk Scale? An Exploratory Study,” Archives of Suicide Research, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 13–28, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar#N#See in References#N#] used this technique to readjust the Holmes and Rahe stress inventory to successfully discriminate controls from suicide attempters.
How many languages are there in WHODAS?
WHODAS has been translated into more than ten languages; it is useful in the evaluation of disability in mental health conditions but also in a wide range of physical health diseases [ 8. WHO, WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), 2017, http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/whodasii/en/.
What are the inclusion criteria for psychiatry?
Exclusion criteria were illiteracy, refusal to participate, and situations in which the patient’s state of health did not allow for written informed consent.
How many different diagnoses are there in ICD 10?
Table 1 shows ICD 10 diagnosis of patients. There were 171 different diagnoses as some patients had comorbid diagnosis. Table 2 shows the scores for CGI.
Who is trained in WHODAS 2.0?
All clinicians (psychiatrists, psychologists, and mental health nurses) were trained in the use of WHODAS 2.0 and ICG in December 2016 in a consensus meeting and after that, all of them were encouraged to use the instruments in their daily clinical practice. They were all asked to assess between 5 to 7 patients.
What is assessment and treatment planning?
The assessment and treatment planning process should lead to the individualization of treatment, appropriate client–treatment matching, and the monitoring of goal attainment (Allen and Mattson 1993). The Institute of Medicine (1990) noted that treatment outcomes may be improved significantly by matching individuals to treatments based on variables assessed in the problem assessment and personal assessment stages of the comprehensive assessment process. Although the results of Project MATCH have raised questions about the viability of matching treatments to client attributes (Project MATCH Research Group 1997 a ), there was evidence on a number of variables, including anger, severity of concomitant psychiatric problems, and social support for drinking, that was sufficient to warrant continued attempts to identify potential matches between client characteristics and types of treatment (Project MATCH Research Group 1997 b, 1998). Similarly, there is evidence that matching therapeutic services to the presence, nature, and severity of problems clients present at treatment entry leads to improved outcomes (McLellan et al. 1997). Assessment at intake will continue to be instrumental in attempting to match clients to the most appropriate available treatment options; however, assessment also should be viewed as a continuous process that allows monitoring of treatment progress, refocusing and reprioritizing of treatment goals and interventions across time, and determination of outcome (Donovan 1988; Institute of Medicine 1990; L.C. Sobell et al. 1994 a; Donovan 1998).
What is the purpose of assessment in counseling?
Within the clinical context, the primary goal of assessment is to determine those characteristics of the client and his or her life situation that may influence treatment decisions and contribute to the success of treatment (Allen 1991). Additionally, assessment procedures are crucial to the treatment planning process. Treatment planning involves the integration of assessment information concerning the person’s drinking behavior, alcohol–related problems, and other areas of psychological and social functioning to assist the client and clinician to develop and prioritize short– and long–term goals for treatment, select the most appropriate interventions to address the identified problems, determine and address perceived barriers to treatment engagement and compliance, and monitor progress toward the specified goals, which will typically include abstinence and/or harm reduction and improved psychosocial functioning (P.M. Miller and Mastria 1977; L.C. Sobell et al. 1982; Washousky et al. 1984; L.C. Sobell et al. 1988; Bois and Graham 1993).
Why do people drink?
It is often presumed that individuals drink in order to achieve or enhance the emotional or behavioral outcomes that they expect; thus, these expectancies are often viewed as being reflective of the individual’s possible “reasons for drinking” (Cronin 1997; Galen et al. 2001). Individuals differ with respect to both their experiences with alcohol and drinking and with the resultant beliefs and expectations they hold about alcohol’s anticipated effects. To the extent that individuals are found to hold expectancies that serve a functional role in maintaining problematic drinking behavior, they may be assigned to treatment strategies designed to challenge or modify their beliefs about alcohol’s effects on mood and behavior and to substitute more adaptive or realistic expectations, with the prediction that decreases in positive expectancies associated with alcohol would be associated with a decrease in drinking behavior (Oei and Jones 1986; S.A. Brown et al. 1988; Connors and Maisto 1988 a; Connors et al. 1992; Darkes and Goldman 1993; Oei and Baldwin 1994; Darkes and Goldman 1998).
What are cognitive factors in drinking?
2001). Two broad categories of such cognitive factors having implications for the development and maintenance of drinking problems and for potential relapse following treatment are (1) the individual’s expectations about drinking and the anticipated effects of alcohol and (2) the individual’s expectations about one’s ability to cope adequately with problems (self–efficacy expectations). These categories and related instruments are discussed in the following sections.
What is the tendency of heavy drinkers to minimize or deny that they have a drinking problem?
One view is that this is part of a defensive process of “denial, ” or the tendency of heavy drinkers to minimize or deny that they have a “drinking problem.” This stance, thought to be unconscious and protective of the individual’s perception of self, has continued to exert an important influence both in definitions of alcoholism (e.g., Morse and Flavin 1992) and in the development of patient placement criteria (e.g., Mee–Lee et al. 1996).
How to determine if someone has a family history of alcoholism?
Determination of the presence or absence of a family history of alcoholism has been based primarily on individuals’ self–reports concerning the drinking behavior and consequences of their parents or first–degree relatives. In some cases, this has involved the use of structured diagnostic interview protocols, such as the Family History– Research Diagnostic Criteria (FH–RDC) (Endicott et al. 1975; Merikangas et al. 1998), in which the individual is interviewed with a focus on parental drinking behavior and other psychiatric disorders to determine whether the diagnostic criteria of alcohol abuse or dependence are met.
What are the stages of alcohol abuse?
The first two stages involve screening, case finding, and identification of a substance use disorder; an evaluation of the parameters of drinking behavior, signs, symptoms, and severity of alcohol dependence, and negative consequences of use; and formal diagnosis of alcohol abuse or dependence.
How to start a treatment plan?
Every good treatment plan starts with a clear goal (or set of goals). Identify what your client would like to work on and write it down. Don't be scared of limiting your work, you can always adjust these as time goes on. However, it's helpful to write down and discuss what your client's purpose is for starting therapy.
What is treatment planning?
Treatment planning isn't something you do at the first or second session and then forget about. It's an integral part of the counseling process. It's a clinical discussion that's simply put on paper to provide a clear outline and clearer understanding of the direction in which you plan to go.
What makes therapy more effective?
A couple things we know for sure- 1) talking with clients about progress makes therapy more effective and meaningful for clients and 2) most ethical guidelines state that a therapist or counselor should have a treatment plan in mind while working with clients.
Why is it important to have a clear goal?
Having a clear goal makes sure everyone is on the same page and keeps you both accountable to focusing on what is necessary. It also helps your client to feel like therapy is something that is more than esoteric, something they could describe to a spouse or family member, if desired. 2. Active participation.
Is therapy hard work?
Therapy is often hard work but can have amazing results. However, success is 100% dependent on the client's motivation and willingness to engage in the process. 3. Support. Another aspect of treatment planning that is so often forgotten in private practice settings is the client's support system.
Versions
- Depending on the information needed, the study design and the time constraints, the user may choose between multiple versions with different options for administration: 36-item version Provides most detail Allows to compute overall and 6 domain-specific functioning scores Available as interviewer-, self-, and proxy-administered forms Average interview time: 20 min. 1…
Administration
- Self-administration: A paper-and-pencil version of WHODAS 2.0 can be self-administered. Interview: WHODAS 2.0 can be administered in person or over the telephone. General interview techniques are sufficientto administer the interview in this mode. Proxy: Sometimes it may be desirable to obtain a third-party view of functioning such as; family members, caretakers or othe…
Scoring
- There are two basic options for computing the summary scores for the WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions Simple: the scores assigned to each of the items – “none” (0), “mild” (1) “moderate”(2), “severe” (3) and “extreme” (4) – are summed. This method is referred to as simple scoring because the scores from each of the items are simply added up witho...
Das 2.0 Domain Scores
- WHODAS 2.0 produces domain-specific scores for six different functioning domains – cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along, life activities (household and work) and participation.
Psychometric Qualities
- Test-retest studies of the 36-item scale in countries across the world found it to be highly reliable.
- All items were selected on the basis of item–response theory (i.e. the application of mathematical models to data gathered from questionnaires and tests).
- Showed a robust factor structure (see below) that remained constant across cultures and dif…
- Test-retest studies of the 36-item scale in countries across the world found it to be highly reliable.
- All items were selected on the basis of item–response theory (i.e. the application of mathematical models to data gathered from questionnaires and tests).
- Showed a robust factor structure (see below) that remained constant across cultures and different types of patient populations.
- The validation studies also showed that it compared well with other measures of disability or health status, and with clinician and proxy ratings.
Development History
- To emphasize the need for standardized cross-cultural measurement of health status, WHO developed a general measure of functioning and disability in major life domains.
- The original Disability Schedule WHO/DAS published by WHO in 1988 – was an instrument developed to assess functioning, mainly in psychiatric inpatients.
- WHODAS 2.0 superseded WHODAS II and is an altogether different instrument that is ground…
- To emphasize the need for standardized cross-cultural measurement of health status, WHO developed a general measure of functioning and disability in major life domains.
- The original Disability Schedule WHO/DAS published by WHO in 1988 – was an instrument developed to assess functioning, mainly in psychiatric inpatients.
- WHODAS 2.0 superseded WHODAS II and is an altogether different instrument that is grounded in the conceptual framework of the ICF.
- It integrates an individual's level of functioning in major life domains directly corresponds with ICF's "activity and participation" dimensions.
Process of Development
- WHODAS 2.0 was developed through a collaborative international approach, with the aim of developing a single generic instrument for assessing health status and disability across different cultures and settings. The collaborative internationalresearch involved in developing WHODAS 2.0 included: 1. A critical review of conceptualization and measurement of functioning and disability…
Psychometric Properties
Scoring and Interpretation
- There are two scoring methods used for the WHODAS 2.0: 1. Score (and its percentile) 2. Average score (and its descriptor) The first score is determined using “item-response-theory” (IRT), where it takes into account multiple levels of difficulty for each WHODAS 2.0 item (1-36). This type of scoring for WHODAS 2.0 allows for more fine-grained analy...
Developer
- Ustun, T.B, Kostanjsek, N., Chatterji, S., Rehm, J (Ed.). (2010). Measuring health and disability : manual for WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/measuring-health-and-disability-manual-for-who-disability-assessment-schedule-(-whodas-2.0)
References
- American Psychiatric Association. Online Assessment Measures. (n.d.). Retrieved November 6, 2021, from https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/Psychiatrists/Practice/DSM/APA_DSM5_WHODAS-2-Self-Administered.pdf
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Conclusion
- We found that WHODAS 2.0 is a useful scale for measuring severity of illness scored by clinicians with ICG, and so WHODAS 2.0 correctly classifies 59.0% of the patients. Compared with the traditional correction of WHODAS 2.0, FLDA improves accuracy in near 15% with respect to the traditional method. However, as it is shown in the classification map...
Acknowledgments