ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2025
Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of a German version of the Activity Patterns Scale (APS-GE) in a large sample of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acknowledging the multidimensionality of pain-related activity patterns led to the development of a new self-report instrument, the Activity Patterns Scale (APS), linking activity pacing to underlying goals. Owing to the scarcity of validated instruments assessing different dimensions of pain-related avoidance, persistence, and pacing behaviors in Germany, our aim was to develop a German version, the APS-GE and to evaluate its psychometric properties in a representative sample of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Methods: The APS was translated and culturally adapted following the multistep approach recommended by the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons Outcomes Committee. A comprehensive psychometric evaluation was carried out in 579 patients suffering from chronic musculoskeletal pain. To assess test-retest reliability, the APS-GE was administered twice to a subgroup of patients. Structural validity was tested using covariance and confirmatory factor analysis. To investigate construct and criterion validity, hypotheses were formulated based on the existing literature addressing expected correlations between APS-GE subscales and established questionnaires, and correlations between activity patterns and several functional and psychological outcomes. Results: Activity patterns varied regarding their test-retest stability. Factor analysis confirmed the multidimensional 8-factor structure proposed previously. For most APS-GE subscales, acceptable construct validity was demonstrated. Interestingly, only 62.5% of hypotheses describing expected associations of activity patterns with functional and psychological outcomes (criterion-related validity) could be confirmed. Conclusions: The APS-GE appears to be a change-sensitive instrument for the multidimensional assessment of pain-related activity patterns. Remaining conceptual ambiguities should be reevaluated in future studies. Discrepancies to previous investigations regarding the adaptivity of activity patterns could be due to methodological variations across studies. Preliminary implications for putative motivational mechanisms underlying behavioral dimensions are discussed.
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.