Cited by 29Connective tissue disorders researchDiversity and Impact of DanceOral and gingival health research

The prevalence of generalized and syndromic hypermobility in elite Australian dancers

Chan, Cliffton, Hopper, Luke, Zhang, Feili, Pacey, Verity, Nicholson, Leslie L.·2018·Physical Therapy in Sport

Abstract

Objectives To determine the prevalence of Generalized Joint Hypermobility (GJH) and Joint Hypermobility Syndrome/Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome-Hypermobility Type (JHS/EDS-HT) among dancers using established validated measures.Design Observational Cohort Study.Setting Laboratory.Participants 85 dancers from two dance institutions.Main outcome measures GJH was determined using the Beighton score (cut-point ≥5/9) and the Lower Limb Assessment Scale (LLAS) (cut-point ≥7/12). Presence of JHS/EDS-HT was assessed using the Brighton and Villefranche criteria. Paired sample t-test was performed to compare LLAS side-to-side scores, and percentage disagreements calculated to determine differences between the two GJH and the two JHS/EDS-HT measures.Results 72% of dancers met the Beighton cut-point for GJH, while 38% and 42% met the LLAS cut-point on the left and right respectively. The proportion of dancers identified with GJH was different when assessed using the Beighton compared to the left and right LLAS (both p < 0.001), a disagreement of 48% and 46% respectively, with Beighton classifying more participants as having GJH. The Villefranche identified more dancers with JHS/EDS-HT than the Brighton (84% vs 31%, p < 0.001), with 54% disagreement.Conclusions High prevalence of generalized and syndromic hypermobility was found regardless of the criteria used. A higher Beighton cut-point, e.g. ≥6/9, to identify true GJH amongst dancers maybe warranted.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ptsp.2018.02.001

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Among professional dancers, the prevalence of GJH ranges between 64.9% and 72%.

    “Among professional dancers, the prevalence ranges between 64.9% and 72%.[20,21]”

    From Hypermobility spectrum disorders: A review (2023) · cites this paper as [20]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chan, C., Hopper, L., Zhang, F., Pacey, V., & Nicholson, L. L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Edith Cowan University (AU)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
Corresponding author
Chan, Cliffton
Venue
Physical Therapy in Sport
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-07
Volume
32
Pages
15-21
ISSN
1466-853X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2788310039
Cited by
29
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physical Therapy in Sport (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edith Cowan University Research Online (Edith Cowan University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Sydney (2015/001)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Connective tissue disorders research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Diversity and Impact of Dance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Oral and gingival health research
Keywords
generalized joint hypermobility, joint hypermobility syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome hypermobility type, dancers, Beighton score, Brighton criteria, prevalence, diagnostic agreement, cut points
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Australia, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dancing, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Female, Humans, Joint Instability, Male, Cohort Studies, Prevalence, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review