• Tzu-Ying Chiu, Chia-Feng Yen, Cheng-Hsiu Chou, Jin-Ding Lin, Ai-Wen Hwang, Hua-Fang Liao, and Wen-Chou Chi.
• Institute of Medical Science, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan.
• Res Dev Disabil. 2014 Nov 1; 35 (11): 2812-20.

BackgroundWorld 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.AimsTo 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionFor 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.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

23 keywords...

hide…