ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Chinese Translation and Validation of the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Questionnaires on Overuse Injuries and Health Problems.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. 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.
- Pain Sensitivity, Pain Catastrophizing and Fear-Avoidance in Adult Runners: Injured vs. Uninjured Comparisons and Multivariable Associations.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The importance of monitoring both physical and mental health in athletes across different levels of sport is increasingly acknowledged due to potential injury risks. However, for the Chinese-speaking population, there has not yet been an appropriate assessment tool available. Purpose: To translate, culturally adapt, and assess the validity and reliability of the Chinese versions of the updated Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Overuse Injury Questionnaire (OSTRC-O2) and the Health Problems Questionnaire (OSTRC-H2) among Taiwanese collegiate athletes. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence: 3. Methods: The OSTRC-O2 and OSTRC-H2 questionnaires were translated from English to Chinese following international guidelines. Subsequently, 80 and 84 collegiate athletes, respectively, were invited to complete these questionnaires on a weekly basis for 8 weeks. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach alpha coefficient, while test-retest reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Severity scores from the questionnaires were also documented. Results: High response rates of 90% (n = 72/80) and 90.5% (n = 76/84) were achieved in the OSTRC-O2.CH and OSTRC-H2.CH groups, respectively, demonstrating strong acceptance among athletes, with no significant issues in back-translation. High content validity was observed across the different body parts in the translated OSTRC-O2, with Cronbach alpha values of .82, .83, .82, and .83 for the knee, shoulder, elbow, and lower back, respectively. The translated OSTRC-H2 also showed excellent internal consistency, with a Cronbach alpha of .95. The ICC values for test-retest reliability were 0.88, 0.82, 0.92, and 0.92 for the knee, shoulder, elbow, and lower back in the OSTRC-O2, and the ICC for the OSTRC-H2 was 0.90, indicating very good reliability for both questionnaires. Conclusion: The Chinese versions of the OSTRC questionnaires were found to be valid and reliable for monitoring overuse injuries and health issues among Chinese-speaking collegiate 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.