ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Get Active Questionnaire for Pregnancy and its companion form to assess physical activity readiness.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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.
- Physical activity levels and their multilevel determinants in pregnant women screened for contraindications: a cross-sectional study in Shanghai, China.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Stay in Play: a FIFA decision aid for football participation during pregnancy.British journal of sports medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEngaging in physical activity is essential for a healthy pregnancy. A reliable tool is necessary to enhance the assessment and counseling of safe physical activity. This study aimed to translate the original English Get Active Questionnaire for Pregnancy (GAQ-P) and its companion Health Care Provider Consultation Form for Prenatal Physical Activity (cHCP-CF-PPA) into simplified Chinese language and evaluate the psychometric properties in Chinese pregnant women.
methodsThe Brislin's model of translation was employed to translate the GAQ-P/cHCP-CF-PPA tool. We conducted a cross-sectional study at a tertiary women's hospital in Shanghai, China, enrolling a convenience sample of 325 pregnant women across all trimesters to evaluate the psychometric properties of the GAQ-P/cHCP-CF-PPA. Reliability was assessed through test-retest reliability and inter-rater reliability, while validity was examined using content validity, known-groups validity, and criterion validity. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated using PARmed-X for Pregnancy as the gold standard.
resultsRegarding content validity, the GAQ-P had an average S-CVI/UA of 0.81 (I-CVIs: 0.83-1.0), while the cHCP-CF-PPA exhibited an average S-CVI/UA of 0.87 (I-CVIs: 0.83-1.0). The GAQ-P/cHCP-CF-PPA scores effectively distinguished women recommended for physical activity from those with contraindications. The Spearman's correlations between the GAQ-P/cHCP-CF-PPA and the PARmed-X for Pregnancy were 0.851 for absolute contraindications and 0.847 for relative contraindications. The test-retest reliability score was 0.759 for physical activity contraindications, and 0.953 for inter-rater reliability. The sensitivity of the GAQ-P/cHCP-CF-PPA was determined to be 90.00%, with a specificity of 98.31%. The positive predictive value was 78.26%, while the negative predictive value reached 99.32%.
conclusionThe Chinese version of the GAQ-P/cHCP-CF-PPA is a reliable and valid tool for assessing physical activity readiness in pregnant women.
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.