Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 971

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Work Limitations Questionnaire

Lerner, Debra, Amick, Benjamin C., Rogers, William H., Malspeis, Susan, Bungay, Kathleen, Cynn, Diane·2001·Medical Care
DOI 10.1097/00005650-200101000-00009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work was to develop a psychometrically sound questionnaire for measuring the on-the-job impact of chronic health problems and/or treatment ("work limitations"). RESEARCH DESIGN: Three pilot studies (focus groups, cognitive interviews, and an alternate forms test) generated candidate items, dimensions, and response scales. Two field trials tested the psychometric performance of the questionnaire (studies 1 and 2). To test recall error, study 1 subjects were randomly assigned to 2 different questionnaire groups, a questionnaire with a 4-week reporting period completed once or a 2-week version completed twice. Responses were compared with data from concurrent work limitation diaries (the gold standard). To test construct validity, we compared questionnaire scores of patients with those of healthy job-matched control subjects. Study 2 was a cross-sectional mail survey testing scale reliability and construct validity. SUBJECTS: The study subjects were employed individuals (18-64 years of age) from several chronic condition groups (study 1, n = 48; study 2, n = 121) and, in study 1, 17 healthy matched control subjects. MEASURES: Study 1 included the assigned questionnaires and weekly diaries. Study 2 included the new questionnaire, SF-36, and work productivity loss items. RESULTS: In study 1, questionnaire responses were consistent with diary data but were most highly correlated with the most recent week. Patients had significantly higher (worse) limitation scores than control subjects. In study 2, 4 scales from a 25-item questionnaire achieved Cronbach alphas of > or = 0.90 and correlated with health status and self-reported work productivity in the hypothesized manner (P < or = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: With 25 items, 4 dimensions (limitations handling time, physical, mental-interpersonal, and output demands), and a 2-week reporting period, the Work Limitations Questionnaire demonstrated high reliability and validity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005650-200101000-00009

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Kaye, 1996, Disabil Stats Abstract, 17, 1
  2. Lerner, 2000, Disabil Rehabil, 22, 225, 10.1080/096382800296791 · DOI
  3. Hoffman, 1996, JAMA, 276, 1473, 10.1001/jama.1996.03540180029029 · DOI
  4. Ormel, 1999, Psychol Med, 29, 847, 10.1017/S0033291799008600 · DOI
  5. Greenberg, 1993, J Clin Psychiatry, 54, 405
  6. Johns, 1994, J Appl Psychol, 79, 229, 10.1037/0021-9010.79.2.229 · DOI
  7. Osterhaus, 1992, Pharmacoeconomics, 2, 67, 10.2165/00019053-199202010-00008 · DOI
  8. Reilly, 1993, Pharmacoeconomics, 4, 353, 10.2165/00019053-199304050-00006 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Baker, 1991, Epilepsy Res, 8, 245, 10.1016/0920-1211(91)90071-M · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Lerner, D., Amick, B. C., Rogers, W. H., Malspeis, S., Bungay, K., & Cynn, D.
Venue
Medical Care
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2001-01
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
72-85
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00005650-200101000-00009
OpenAlex
W1973735623
Cited by
971
References
2
FWCI
69.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.