Validation of the Brazilian Version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) for Women After Breast Cancer Surgery.
Lia Rodrigues Rocha, Thalia Oliveira Ximenes, Elidia Nascimento da Silva and 3 others
PMID 40955199WHAT IT FOUND
The Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 reliably measures disability in women after breast cancer surgery.
Total scores are stable over time and correlate strongly with quality of life. Use it to track function, but note that sexual activity items are often left unanswered.
Key findings
01The WHODAS 2.0 total score showed good internal consistency and test-retest reliability in this population.
02WHODAS disability scores correlated strongly with FACT-B+ 4 quality of life scores, supporting its validity.
03Participants frequently did not answer the sexual activity question, affecting consistency in the 'getting along' domain.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was conducted in a single city in Brazil, so results may not apply to other regions or cultures. Participants were recruited by convenience sampling, which may introduce bias. Almost 30% of approached women were excluded because they did not meet the cognitive screening threshold on the MMSE. The sexual activity item in the 'Getting along' domain was skipped by 32% of participants, reducing the reliability of that specific domain. 20 participants did not complete the retest, so reliability data is based on 75 women.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was approved by the Ethics committee.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the WHODAS 2.0 is equally reliable across all six domains. The 'Self-care' and 'Getting along' domains showed lower internal consistency, partly because many women skipped questions about sexual activity. Interpret scores from these specific domains with more caution than the total score or the 'Participation' domain.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →