ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026
Translation, cross-cultural validity and reliability of a Danish version of the Banff Patella Instability Instrument 2.0 (BPII 2.0).
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2026. 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.
- Translation, cross-cultural validity and reliability of a Danish version of the Banff Patella Instability Instrument 2.0 (BPII 2.0).Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally validate a Danish version of the BPII 2.0, and assess its construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability in a Danish population of patients with patellar instability. Methods: The BPII 2.0 was translated and cross-culturally validated according to international guidelines, including 15 think-aloud interviews in patients with patellar instability. Responses from 100 patients with patellar instability were accustomed to evaluating, construct validity, floor and ceiling effect, minimal detectable change, internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity was assessed using Spearman Rho ( Results: Minor comprehensibility issues were corrected during translation, and patients found the BPII 2.0-DK relevant and comprehensive. High positive correlations were found with the Kujala-DK ( Conclusion: The BPII 2.0-DK is a relevant, comprehensible, and comprehensive tool for patients with patellar instability. There was a high positive correlation between BPII 2.0 and Kujala-DK, IKDC and VISA-P. Furthermore, excellent internal consistency reliability and high test-retest reliability were found. Level of Evidence: Level III.
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.