ArticleSports medicine - open2026
Validation of the Japanese Version of the Rating of Fatigue Scale.
Article in Sports medicine - open, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFatigue research remains important across a wide range of fields. In Japan, fatigue has become a major social issue, and research using Japanese population data is expected to contribute to both practical interventions and theoretical advances. Although several Japanese scales for assessing fatigue have been developed, brief instruments designed to measure fatigue during ongoing activity are limited. Therefore, this study translated the Rating of Fatigue (ROF) scale into Japanese and examined the validity of the Japanese version (ROF-J).
methodsFirst, the original ROF was translated into Japanese and back-translated. The comparability of language and similarity of interpretability between the original ROF and the ROF-J were evaluated. These procedures were conducted between July and October 2024. Second, the face validity and concurrent validity of the ROF-J were examined in a questionnaire survey of 85 university students at Tohoku University, Japan, in October 2024. Third, convergent validity was examined by comparing ROF-J scores before and after physical exercise among 35 university sports team members at Tohoku University, Japan, in November 2024.
resultsAs a result of the comparison between the original ROF and the ROF-j, the comparability of language and similarity of interpretability were generally within acceptable limits. According to the examination of face validity of the ROF-J, participants generally agreed that the ROF-J measured fatigue, supporting its face validity. In addition, ROF-J scores showed a significant positive correlation with scores on an established Japanese fatigue questionnaire, supporting concurrent validity. The survey for examining convergent validity indicated that ROF-J scores increased significantly after exercise.
conclusionsThese findings indicate that the ROF-J demonstrates adequate validity. The scale provides a brief and practical Japanese instrument for assessing subjective fatigue during ongoing activity and may facilitate both applied fatigue assessment and future fatigue research in Japan.
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.