ArticleBMC pediatrics2023
Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validation of the Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ) into Brazilian Portuguese in patients with cerebral palsy.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric properties of functional mobility outcome measures in children with arthrogryposis multiplex congenita.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to translate, cross-culturally adapt and validate the Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ) into Brazilian Portuguese.
methodsThe translation and cross-cultural adaptation was carried out in accordance with international recommendations. The FAQ was applied to a sample of 102 patients diagnosed with cerebral palsy (CP). Construct validity was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient (rho), and the FAQ score was correlated with the Functional Mobility Scale (FMS) and Gross Motor Function Classification Scale (GMFCS). A subsample of 50 patients was used to assess reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimum detectable difference (MDD). Ceiling and floor effects were also evaluated.
resultsThe Brazilian version of the FAQ showed excellent test-retest reliability by the assessment of the physiotherapist (ICC = 0.99) and respondent (ICC = 0.97), as well as excellent inter-examiner reliability (ICC = 0.94). The SEM was 0.23 (physiotherapist), 0.47 (respondent) and 0.64 (inter-examiner), while the MDD was 0.64 (physiotherapist), 1.29 (respondent) and 1.76 (inter-examiner). The classification of gross motor function showed a high correlation with the FAQ applied by the physiotherapist (rho = -0.89) and by the respondent (rho = -0.87). The FMS-5 m was highly correlated with the FAQ applied by the physiotherapist and the respondent (rho = 0.88 and rho = 0.87, respectively). The FMS-50 and FMS-500 presented very high correlation with the FAQ applied by the physiotherapist (rho = 0.91 for both) and high correlation with the FAQ applied by the respondent (rho = 0.89 and rho = 0.88, respectively). The Brazilian version of the FAQ did not present the ceiling and floor effects.
conclusionThe FAQ presented adequate psychometric properties in patients with CP, indicating that it is possible to use it as a measure of functional gait mobility in Brazil.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.