ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Cross-cultural translation, adaptation, and validation of the Chinese versions of the athlete fear avoidance questionnaire and fear of return to sport scale.
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
backgroundSports injuries not only impose periods of physical rest, but they can also provoke negative psychological responses, particularly fear, that can delay return to sport (RTS) and elevate reinjury risk. Although various instruments, including the Athlete Fear Avoidance Questionnaire (AFAQ) and the Fear of Return to Sport Scale (FRESS), are available to assess such fear-related factors, validated Simplified-Chinese versions have not yet been developed.
methodsThis study conducted a systematic cross-cultural translation and psychometric validation of the AFAQ and the FRESS into Chinese (AFAQ-Ch and FRESS-Ch), following established international guidelines. Phase 1, which involved 30 athletes who had sustained an injury within the previous year (age: M = 20.6, SD = 2.4), comprised forward-backward translation, an expert panel review, and a face validity evaluation. Phase 2 assessed internal consistency, test-retest reliability, structural validity, and convergent validity among a larger sample of 204 Chinese injured athletes (age: M = 21.4, SD = 3.2), using the Simplified-Chinese Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (SC-TSK) and the Injury-Psychological Readiness to Return to Sport Scale (I-PRRS-Ch) as theoretically related comparison instruments.
resultsBoth the AFAQ-Ch and the FRESS-Ch demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.748 and 0.736, respectively) and acceptable test-retest reliability. The AFAQ-Ch showed good test-retest reliability, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.855 (95% CI [0.790, 0.900], F[96, 96] = 12.759, p < .001), whereas the FRESS-Ch demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability, with an ICC of 0.729 (95% CI [0.620, 0.810], F[96, 96] = 6.372, p < .001). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the structural validity of the AFAQ-Ch and FRESS-Ch, with acceptable model fit for the AFAQ-Ch and generally acceptable fit for the FRESS-Ch. Evidence of convergent validity was demonstrated through significant correlations. A significant moderate positive correlation was observed between the AFAQ-Ch and the FRESS-Ch (r = .484, p < .001).
conclusionsThese findings indicate that the AFAQ-Ch and the FRESS-Ch can be reliably used in clinical and research settings to assess fear among Chinese-speaking athletes following injury.
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.