Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the HSS Pedi-FABS confirms its reliability for assessing physical activity in children.
Background: The Hospital for Special Surgery Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale (HSS Pedi-FABS) is a user-friendly tool for assessing physical activity levels in children and adolescents. As sports-related activities become increasingly popular in east Asia, there is a growing need for a validated Chinese version of the scale to assess pediatric functional activity levels. Hypothesis: The Chinese version of the HSS Pedi-FABS will demonstrate adequate reliability and validity. Methods: Following standardized guidelines for forward-backward translation and cross-cultural adaptation, a Chinese version of the HSS Pedi-FABS was developed. A total of 76 children, aged 9 to 18 years, participated in the validation study. All participants completed the Chinese HSS Pedi-FABS twice, with a test-retest interval of 14 to 28 days. Each participant was also asked to complete either the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children (PAQ-C) or the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adolescents (PAQ-A), both in Chinese. These scales were chosen as they are widely recognized and commonly used worldwide. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to assess test-retest reliability, while internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha. Construct validity was determined by correlating scores from the Chinese version of the HSS Pedi-FABS with those of the validated Chinese PAQ-C or PAQ-A. Results: All 76 participants were included in the analysis, with a mean test-retest interval of 17 ± 3.4 days. Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.93). Internal consistency was good, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.84. The Chinese version of the HSS Pedi-FABS showed good construct validity, demonstrating significant correlations with both the PAQ-A (r = 0.71, p < 0.01) and the PAQ-C (r = 0.72, p < 0.01). Conclusion: The Chinese version of the HSS Pedi-FABS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing physical activity levels in children and adolescents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: