ArticleBMC public health2023
A tool to assess fitness among adults in public health studies - Predictive validity of the FFB-Mot questionnaire.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differences in Physical Fitness and Health-Related Variables Between Older Adults With Versus Without Self-Reported Impairments in Activities of Daily Living: A Population-Based Study.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
- A Multi-Domain Physical Fitness Dataset of Central European Adults: Strength, Flexibility, Stability, and Aerobic Capacity.Scientific data · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFitness has important implications for physical activity behavior and is associated with various health-related outcomes. It can be assessed through a test battery or a self-reported questionnaire. One example is the FFB-Mot (Funktionsfragebogen Motorik; engl. functional fitness questionnaire) which consist of 28 items to assess four components of fitness in adults: cardiorespiratory fitness/ endurance, muscular strength, gross motor coordination, and flexibility. The aims of this manuscript were to (1) provide an English-version of the FFB-Mot questionnaire (developed from the German-version using translation and back-translation) to the international community of researchers in the areas of physical activity, fitness and health in adults, and (2) examine the predictive validity of the FFB-Mot questionnaire in a large sample of community-dwelling adults.
methodsWe used data from a longitudinal study in Germany with four measurement waves over a period of 18 years, with samples ranging between 310 and 437 participants (1572 adults in total, mean ages 46-58 years). To assess predictive validity, we calculated Pearson correlations between FFB-Mot data collected in 1997 and external health-related criteria (i.e., subjective health status, physician-rated health status, back pain, physical complaints and physical activity in minutes per week) collected in 2002, 2010, and 2015, and separately for males and females.
resultsWe observed correlations between higher FFB-Mot scores with better subjective health status (in 2002: males, r = 0.25; females, r = 0.18; in 2010: males, r = 0.29; females, r = 0.28; in 2015: males, r = 0.40), and higher physical activity (in 2002: males, r = 0.24; females, r = 0.25; in 2010: males, r = 0.30; females, r = 0.38; in 2015: females, r = 0.27). Higher FFB-Mot scores were also correlated with lower back pain (in 2002: males, r = -0.23; females, r = -0.25; in 2010: females, r = -0.22), less physical complaints (in 2002: males, r = -0.36; females, r = -0.24), and better physician-rated health status (in 2002: males, r = -0.41; females, r = -0.29, 2010: males, r = -0.38; females, r = -0.44; in 2015: males, r = -0.47).
conclusionsOur results suggest that the FFB-Mot to assess fitness in adults has predictive validity for health-related outcomes as indicated by significant correlations, albeit some effect sizes are small. The FFB-Mot may be used as one-time assessment of self-reported fitness, or for repeated testing to assess change of self-reported fitness over time and in different settings (e.g., public health research).
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.