RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Psychometric evaluation of the improved work-disability functional assessment battery
Meterko, M., Marino, M., Ni, P., Marfeo, E., McDonough, C. M., Jette, A., Peterik, K., Rasch, E., Brandt, D. E., & Chan, L. (2019). Psychometric evaluation of the improved work-disability functional assessment battery. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 100(8), 1442-1449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.09.125
OBJECTIVE: To assess psychometric properties of the improved Work Disability Functional Assessment Battery (WD-FAB 2.0).
DESIGN: Longitudinal study.
SETTING: Community.
PARTICIPANTS: Three samples of working-age (21-66) adults (N=1006): (1) unable to work because of a physical condition (n=375); (2) unable to work because of a mental health condition (n=296); (3) general United States working age sample (n=335).
INTERVENTION: NA.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All samples completed the WD-FAB 2.0; the second administration came 5 days after the first. Construct validity was examined by convergent and divergent correlational analysis using legacy measures. Test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC3,1). Standard error of the mean (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC90) were calculated to measure scale precision and sensitivity.
RESULTS: Physical function ICCs ranged from 0.69 to 0.77 in the general sample, and 0.66 to 0.86 in the disability sample. Mental health function scales ICCs ranged from 0.62 to 0.73 in the general sample, and 0.74 to 0.76 in the disability sample. SEMs for all scales indicated good discrimination; those for the physical function scales were generally lower than those for the mental health scales. MDC90 values ranged from 3.41 to 10.55. Correlations between all WD-FAB 2.0 scales and legacy measures were in the expected direction.
CONCLUSIONS: The study provides substantial support for the reliability and construct validity of the WD-FAB 2.0 among 3 diverse samples. Although initially developed for use within the Social Security Administration (SSA), these results suggest that the WD-FAB 2.0 could be used for assessment and measurement of work-related physical and mental health function in other contexts as well.