Development and initial testing of a brief, generic self-reported disability questionnaire: The Universal Disability Index

Author:

Evans David WilliamORCID

Abstract

Background Disability is an important multifaceted construct. A brief, generic self-reported disability questionnaire that promises a broader and more comparable measure of disability than disease-specific instruments does not currently exist. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate such a questionnaire: the Universal Disability Index (UDI). Methods An online survey was used to collect general population data. Data were randomly divided into training and validation subsets. The dimensionality and structure of eight UDI questionnaire items were evaluated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA, training subset) followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA, validation subset). To assess concurrent validity, the UDI summed score from the full dataset was compared to the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) and the Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS) disability scores. Internal consistency and discriminant validity were also assessed. Bootstrapping was used to evaluate model stability and generalisability. Results 403 participants enrolled; 364 completed at least one UDI item. Three single-factor versions of the UDI were assessed (8-item, 7-item, and 6-item). All versions performed well during EFA and CFA (182 cases assigned to each), but none met the RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) criterion (≤ 0.08). All versions of the UDI had high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α > 0.90), were strongly correlated (Pearson’s r > 0.7) with both GARS and GCPS disability scores, indicating concurrent validity, and could accurately discriminate between upper and lower quartiles of these comparators. Confidence intervals of estimates were narrow, suggesting model stability and generalisability. Conclusions A brief, generic self-reported disability questionnaire was found to be valid and to possess good psychometric properties. The UDI has a single factor structure and either a 6-item, 7-item or 8-item version can be used to measure disability. For brevity and parsimony, the 6-item UDI is recommended, but further testing of all versions is warranted.

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Reference75 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3