ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the University of Wisconsin running injury and recovery index: a reliability and validity study.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo translate and cross-culturally adapt the University of Wisconsin Running Injury and Recovery Index (UWRI) into Arabic (UWRI-Ar) and evaluate its psychometric properties in Arabic-speaking runners with running-related injury (RRI).
methodsA cross-cultural adaptation study with cross-sectional psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability assessment was conducted across multiple physical therapy clinics using online survey administration. Eighty-three Arabic-speaking recreational or competitive runners aged 18-45 years with running-related injuries completed the UWRI-Ar, and 49/83 of participants (i.e., 59%) completed a retest after 2-5 days. Measurement properties evaluated included structural validity using exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects using the 15% threshold, and test-retest reliability with calculation of the standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Construct validity was examined against the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK-17), and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) using Spearman correlations.
resultsExploratory factor analysis supported a one-factor solution (eigenvalue = 4.46), explaining 49.5% of variance with item loadings 0.45-0.87. No floor and ceiling effects were observed. Internal consistency was good (Cronbach's α = 0.889; and McDonald's ω = 0.891). Test-retest reliability was good (ICC
conclusionThe UWRI-Ar demonstrates acceptable structural validity, reliability, and construct validity, supporting its use as a brief, running-specific patient-reported outcome measure for short-term monitoring of recovery progression from running-related injury in Arabic-speaking runners.
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.