ArticlePhysiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy2026
Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Short Version of the Patterns of Activity Measure-Pain in Brazilians With Chronic Pain.
Article in Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy, 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
Abstract
objectiveTo translate, cross-culturally adapt, and validate the short version of the Patterns of Activity Measure-Pain (POAM-P) in Brazilian individuals with chronic pain.
methodsThis was a questionnaire validation study. Brazilian participants reporting pain for more than 3 months were included. The measurement properties assessed were structural validity, construct validity, reliability, internal consistency, and agreement.
resultsThe study included 125 individuals with chronic pain for the analysis of structural and construct validity. The internal structure of the reduced version of the POAM-P, comprising 3 domains and 15 items, was considered adequate (comparative fit index = 0.98; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.97; root mean square error of approximation = 0.07; standardized root mean square residual = 0.06; and chi-square/degrees of freedom = 1.55). Correlations ranging from 0.30 to 0.50 were observed between the avoidance and pacing domains and kinesiophobia, catastrophizing, and disability. The overdoing domain showed no significant correlations with external measures, associating negatively only with the avoidance and pacing domains. Internal consistency was assessed in the total sample (n = 125) using composite reliability (CR), with values ranging from 0.76 to 0.93 across the three POAM-P domains. Test-retest reliability was assessed in a subsample of 33 individuals and proved satisfactory, with intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.79. The test-retest interval was planned to range from 7 to 14 days, with an observed mean of 8 days (7-13). Agreement, assessed via Bland-Altman plots in the same subsample (n = 33), was considered acceptable. No ceiling or floor effects were identified.
conclusionThe Brazilian short version of the POAM-P demonstrated adequate structural validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Nevertheless, further studies with larger retest samples are warranted to confirm the stability of these findings. Regarding construct validity, the avoidance and pacing domains showed correlations with external measures as expected, whereas the overdoing domain was correlated only with the other domains of the instrument.
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.