Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38801562›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2024

Variability of joint hypermobility in children: a meta-analytic approach to set cut-off scores.

Cylie M Williams, James J Welch, Mark Scheper, Louise Tofts, Verity Pacey

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Treatment for symptomatic hypermobility in childhood.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Lower Limb Biomechanical Observations in Hypermobile Children: An Exploratory Case-Control Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Cylie M WilliamsSchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, 47-49 Moorooduc Hwy, Frankston, VIC, 3199, Australia. cylie.williams@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0223-9141
James J WelchAblefeet, 16 Terrace Road, Walton-on-Thames, Surrey, KT12 2SB, UK.
Mark ScheperResearch Center Innovations in Care, Data Supported Healthcare, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Louise ToftsDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Human Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, 2113, Australia.
Verity PaceySchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, 47-49 Moorooduc Hwy, Frankston, VIC, 3199, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current international consensus of the appropriate Beighton score cut-off to define if a child has generalised joint hypermobile or not is based upon expert opinion. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of Beighton scores of children worldwide to provide a recommendation for establishing the Beighton score cut-off to identify generalised joint hypermobility in children. We used AMED, OVID Medline, Embase and CINAHL to find published articles from inception to April 2024 describing Beighton scores of children up to and including 18 years from the general population. We extracted study demographics including country of publication, total number of participants, summary data about the age and sex of participant, Beighton scores and any cut-off used where authors deemed children hypermobile and how many children were rated at the corresponding Beighton scores. There were 37 articles reporting on the prevalence or incidence of hypermobility at cut-off scores from 28,868 participants. Using the cut-off of ≥ 6 resulted in a prevalence of 6% for studies reporting male data and 13% for studies reporting female data. Limited data reporting availability precluded further sub-analysis at a Beighton score of ≥ 7, age, pubertal status and ethnicity.    Conclusion: The working threshold for identifying generalised joint hypermobility in children should be a Beighton score of 6 or more. Our analysis also suggests a Beighton score of 7 or greater may be appropriate in childhood, particularly for females. What is Known: • The working threshold for identifying generalised joint hypermobility in children previously was set based on expert opinion. What is New: • The threshold to identify hypermobility in children should be at a minimum of ≥ 6 on the Beighton score.

Indexed as

Joint InstabilityAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMalePrevalenceAdolescentBeighton scoreChildEhlers DanlosHypermobility

Identifiers

PMID38801562
PMCPMC11263245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.