Cited by 92Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ)

Open access
Williamson, Esther·2006·Australian Journal of Physiotherapy

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0004-9514(06)70052-6

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • FABQ is correlated with Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire (r=0.455, =0.000) and with Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (0.53 for FABQ work subscale and 0.76 for physical activity subscale).

    “FABQ is correlated with Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire (r=0.455, =0.000) and with Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, another measure of fear avoidance (0.53 for FABQ work subscale and 0.76 for the physical activity subscale).37”

    From Protocol for a feasibility and acceptability study using a brief ACT-based intervention for people from Southwest Wales who live with persistent pain (2018) · cites this paper as [37]

    The “Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ)” section reports the stated correlations with the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia: 0.53 for the work subscale and 0.76 for the physical activity subscale. It also reports a correlation with the Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire, but gives 0.52 for the total FABQ, not 0.455, and does not give the claimed significance value. (LLM, conf=0.92)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Holm, 2003, Spine, 28, 828
  2. Kori, 1990, Pain Manag Jan/Feb:, 35

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Williamson, E.
Affiliations
University of Warwick (GB)
Corresponding author
Williamson, Esther
Venue
Australian Journal of Physiotherapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006
Volume
52
Issue
2
Pages
149
ISSN
0004-9514 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2070851915
Cited by
92
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australian Journal of Physiotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
fear-avoidance beliefs, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, fear of pain, psychometric properties
MeSH terms
Aged, Fear, Humans, Personality Assessment, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Low Back Pain

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