ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Transcultural adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the Visceral Sensitivity Index for patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gastrointestinal-specific anxiety (GSA) is a critical psychosomatic factor influencing symptom perception and quality of life in disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI). The Visceral Sensitivity Index (VSI) is a validated instrument used to assess GSA in DGBI such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, a culturally adapted and psychometrically validated Chinese version is currently unavailable. This study aimed to develop and comprehensively validate a Chinese version of the VSI (VSI-C). Methods: The VSI-C was developed through dual translation, back-translation, cultural adaptation, and pilot testing. Its content validity was assessed by an expert panel. The included DGBI patients completed the VSI-C, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15). Structural validity was evaluated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), with the factor model tested by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and further corroborated visually via exploratory graph analysis (EGA). Convergent validity was assessed through Pearson correlations with the HADS and PHQ-15. Internal consistency and split-half reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's Results: A total of 102 DGBI patients were included. The scale demonstrated excellent content validity (S-CVI/Ave = 0.91). EFA identified a stable four-factor structure, which was confirmed by CFA with good model fit (χ Conclusion: The VSI-C is a reliable, valid, and clinically useful tool for assessing GSA in Chinese DGBI patients. Its implementation facilitates the systematic integration of psychological assessment into clinical management, promoting personalized care within a biopsychosocial framework.
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.