ArticleScientific reports2024
The validity and reliability of a Japanese version of the web-based hamstring outcome score.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to translate a web-based hamstring outcome score (HaOS) questionnaire to the Japanese context. First, the validity and reliability of the translated questionnaires were examined among Japanese athletes. Second, the association between the previous history of hamstring strain and HaOS was examined. The translation was performed according to internationally recognized methodologies. A total of 233 athletes were asked to complete the HaOS questionnaire, and four questions were added to examine the content validity of the questionnaire. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to evaluate the test-retest reliability. Internal consistency was determined by calculating Cronbach's alpha values. The translated questionnaires had high acceptance and compliance rates, with a response rate of 84.4%. The ICC for each scale ranged from 0.80 to 0.93, and Cronbach's α from 0.72 to 0.96, confirming good reliability and high internal consistency. HaOS of the previous injury group (93.4 [78.9, 100]) was significantly lower than that of the healthy group (86.2 [68.1, 100]) (p < 0.05). The translated HaOS questionnaires were valid, reliable, and acceptable for monitoring hamstring conditions in Japanese athletes.
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.