10 research outputs found

    WHODAS-2.0 12 item self-administered questionnaire scoring example.

    No full text
    <p>Text downloaded from7 <a href="http://www.who.int/icidh/whodas/instrument_download.html" target="_blank">www.who.int/icidh/whodas/instrument_download.html</a> (27/5/09)</p

    WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum mean scores and standard deviations (SD) for the total population by age group.

    No full text
    <p>WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum mean scores and standard deviations (SD) for the total population by age group.</p

    WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum mean scores and standard deviations (SD), by age group for people with any 12 month mental disorder, and separately for people with 1 and more than 1, 12-month mental disorder.

    No full text
    <p>WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum mean scores and standard deviations (SD), by age group for people with any 12 month mental disorder, and separately for people with 1 and more than 1, 12-month mental disorder.</p

    WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum mean scores and standard deviations (SD), by age group for people with any chronic physical condition, and separately for people with 1 and more than 1, chronic physical condition.

    No full text
    <p>WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum mean scores and standard deviations (SD), by age group for people with any chronic physical condition, and separately for people with 1 and more than 1, chronic physical condition.</p

    WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum scores at the 50<sup>th</sup> through 95<sup>th</sup> percentiles for people with any 12 month mental disorder, and separately for people with 1 and more than 1 12-month mental disorder.

    No full text
    <p>WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum scores at the 50<sup>th</sup> through 95<sup>th</sup> percentiles for people with any 12 month mental disorder, and separately for people with 1 and more than 1 12-month mental disorder.</p

    WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum scores at the 50<sup>th</sup> through 95<sup>th</sup> percentiles for the total population.

    No full text
    <p>WHODAS 2.0 12 item simple sum scores at the 50<sup>th</sup> through 95<sup>th</sup> percentiles for the total population.</p

    Data_Sheet_1_A systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of workplace-based interventions for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use.PDF

    No full text
    Employee alcohol and other drug use can negatively impact the workplace, resulting in absenteeism, reduced productivity, high turnover, and worksite safety issues. As the workplace can influence employee substance use through environmental and cultural factors, it also presents a key opportunity to deliver interventions, particularly to employees who may not otherwise seek help. This is a systematic review of workplace-based interventions for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use. Five databases were searched for efficacy, effectiveness and/or cost-effectiveness studies and reviews published since 2010 that measured use of psychoactive substances (i.e., alcohol, cannabis, hallucinogens, inhalants, opioids, sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytics, and stimulants) as a primary or secondary outcome, in employees aged over 18. Thirty-nine articles were identified, 28 describing primary research and 11 reviews, most of which focused solely on alcohol use. Heterogeneity between studies with respect to intervention and evaluation design limited the degree to which findings could be synthesized, however, there is some promising evidence for workplace-based universal health promotion interventions, targeted brief interventions, and universal substance use screening. The few studies that examined implementation in the workplace revealed specific barriers including lack of engagement with e-health interventions, heavy use and reluctance to seek help amongst male employees, and confidentiality concerns. Tailoring interventions to each workplace, and ease of implementation and employee engagement emerged as facilitators. Further high-quality research is needed to examine the effectiveness of workplace substance use testing, Employee Assistance Programs, and strategies targeting the use of substances other than alcohol in the workplace.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=227598, PROSPERO [CRD42021227598].</p

    Measurement properties of smartphone approaches to assess key lifestyle behaviours: protocol of a systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background: Six core behavioural risk factors (poor diet, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, alcohol misuse, smoking and unhealthy sleep patterns) have been identified as strong determinants of chronic disease, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancers. Smartphones have the potential to provide a real-time, pervasive, unobtrusive and cost-effective way to measure health behaviours and deliver instant feedback to users. Despite this, validity of using smartphones to measure these six key behaviours is largely unknown. The proposed systematic review aims to address this gap by identifying existing smartphone-based approaches to measure these health behaviours and critically appraising, comparing and summarizing the quality of their measurement properties. Methods: A systematic search of the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase (Elsevier), Cochrane Library (Wiley), PsychINFO (EBSCOhost), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), Web of Science (Clarivate), SPORTDiscus (EBSCOhost) and IEEE Xplore Digital Library databases will be conducted from January 2007 to March 2020. Eligible studies will be those written in English that measure at least one of the six health behaviours of interest via a smartphone and report on at least one measurement property. The primary outcomes will be validity, reliability and/or responsiveness of these measurement approaches. A secondary outcome will be the feasibility (e.g. user burden, usability and cost) of identified approaches. No restrictions will be placed on the participant population or study design. Two reviewers will independently screen studies for eligibility, extract data and assess the risk of bias. The study methodological quality (or bias) will be appraised using an appropriate tool. Our results will be described in a narrative synthesis. If feasible, random effects meta-analysis will be conducted where appropriate.Discussion: The results from this review will provide important information about the types of smartphone-based approaches currently available to measure the core behavioural risk factors for chronic disease and the quality of their measurement properties. It will allow recommendations on the most suitable and effective measures of these lifestyle behaviours using smartphones. Valid and reliable measurement of these behaviours and risk factor opens the door to targeted and real-time delivery of health behaviour interventions, providing unprecedented opportunities to offset the trajectory toward chronic disease
    corecore