OBJETIVO: Analizar las propiedades psicométricas del WHODAS 2.0 con pacientes psiquiátricos latinos que residen en Puerto Rico. METODO: Se evaluaron las propiedades psicométricas del WHODAS 2.0, utilizando tanto la versión larga (36 reactivos), como la corta (12 reactivos), considerando respectivamente la confiabilidad interna. Además, se comparó la puntuación total del WHODAS 2.0 (ambas versiones), con la Escala de Evaluación de Actividad Global (GAF). El estudio se llevó a cabo con 200 participantes de ambos géneros, de 21 años en adelante que se encontraban recibiendo tratamiento psicológico o psiquiátrico. RESULTADOS: el WHODAS 2.0, tanto en su versión larga como corta, demostró una confiabilidad interna excelente. Ambas versiones del WHODAS 2.0, se correlacionaron de manera estadísticamente significativa. Por último, el GAF y el WHODAS 2.0, se correlacionaron de manera moderada (r=.37). Este resultado sugiere que los dos instrumentos no están midiendo de manera similar la discapacidad del paciente. CONCLUSION: los resultados proveen apoyo preliminar para el uso del WHODAS 2.0, en el escenario clínico. Sin embargo, se recomienda ser cauteloso ya que la convergencia del WHODAS 2.0 y el GAF debe ser objeto de más estudios. PALABRAS CLAVE: GAF, pacientes psiquiátricos latinos, propiedades psicométricas, WHODAS 2.0.ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To analyze the psychometric properties of WHODAS 2.0 in Puerto Rican psychiatric patients. METHOD: The sample was composed of 200 male and female informants under psychological or psychiatric treatment, who were at least 21 years old. WHODAS 2.0 psychometric properties (both 36 and 12-item versions) were evaluated taking into consideration the internal consistency reliability. In addition, WHODAS 2.0 global score in both versions was compared to the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). RESULTS: Both versions of WHODAS 2.0 showed excellent internal consistency reliability. Both versions correlation was statistically significant. Finally, GAF and WHODAS 2.0 correlation was moderate (r=.37), suggesting both instruments assess patients' disability differently. CONCLUSION: Results appear to indicate that the use of WHODAS 2.0 in clinical contexts is appropriate. However, since WHODAS 2.0 and GAF convergence needs to be studied more thoroughly, caution is advised.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.