ArticleScientific reports2026
Diagnostic validation of the Chinese version of the five-part questionnaire for screening joint hypermobility in young adults.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Joint hypermobility shows considerable variability across populations, yet validated screening tools for Mandarin-speaking cohorts are lacking. The Five-Part Questionnaire (5PQ) is widely used internationally, but its properties have not been evaluated in Chinese populations. This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the 5PQ (5PQ-CN) in a cohort of young Chinese university students. Participants completed the 5PQ-CN and underwent clinician-administered Beighton Score (BS) assessment, using the internationally recommended cut off of ≥ 5 to identify generalised joint hypermobility (GJH). Diagnostic validity was examined using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, accuracy, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Test-retest reliability was evaluated using Cohen's kappa (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). A total of 1,910 participants were recruited; 615 were included in the validity analysis and 325 in the reliability subgroup. The 5PQ-CN showed 78.6% sensitivity, 65.8% specificity, 72.2% accuracy, and an AUC of 0.722. Test-retest reliability demonstrated substantial agreement (κ = 0.703) and moderate consistency for the total score (ICC = 0.707). The 5PQ-CN is a valid and reliable self-report instrument for screening GJH in young Chinese adults within a university setting. Its high feasibility and sensitivity make it a useful complement to clinician-based assessments, particularly in large-scale or resource-limited epidemiological settings.
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.