Table 2. Psychological assessment tools of factors with neutral or positive association with sports injury treatment outcomes.

Category	Scale Name and Acronym	Factor assessed	Length	Reliability: internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha)	Other useful information
Personality traits	Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) (Hathaway and McKinley, 1940) Revised to MMPI-2 (Hathaway et al., 1989)	Personality profile across 10 clinical scales	567 items (MMPI-2)	0.75-0.92	Administration takes 30 minutes or longer. MMPI-2 has replaced the MMPI for routine clinical or research use. Specialised software needed for scoring; not available without trained provider
Personality traits	Swedish Universities Scales of Personality SSP (Gustavsson et al., 2000)	Survey of personality traits including optimism & pessimism (embitterment)	91 items	0.59 for social desirability, 0.74-0.84 all other subscales	Divided into 13 scales including somatic trait anxiety, impulsiveness, adventure seeking, revised version of Karolinska Scales of Personality, embitterment score; was correlated with outcomes in ACLRs (Swirtun and Renström, 2008)
Self-motivation	ACL Return to Sport after Injury Scale (ACL-RSI) (Webster et al., 2008)	Perceived ability and motivation to return to sport	12 items	0.92	Created around psychological response to sport resumption: emotions, confidence in performance, and risk appraisal(Langford et al., 2009)
Self-motivation	Self-motivation Inventory (SMI) (Dishman and Ickes, 1981)	Self-motivation to complete a task	40 items	0.91	Self-motivation was a large predictor of physical therapy adherence (Brewer et al., 2000) Originally validated in patients who were prescribed therapeutic exercise (Dishman and Ickes, 1981).
Self-motivation	Psychovitality (Gobbi and Francisco, 2006)	Motivation and perceived likelihood to return to sport after injury	6 items	No reported internal reliability	Used in two studies study only (Gobbi and Francisco, 2006; Zaffagnini et al., 2008)
Coping	Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ) (Hayes et al., 2004)	Experiential acceptance	9 items	0.70	Relatively insensitive to change with intervention The AAQ includes items such as “I am able to take action on a problem even if I am uncertain what is the right thing to do,” and “my thoughts and feelings get in the way of my success”. AAQ average scores of 42 and 38 represent the upper quartile of experiential avoidance in clinical and non-clinical samples, respectively (Hayes et al., 2004).
Coping	Brief Coping Orientations to the Problem Experience (Brief COPE) inventory (Carver, 1997)	Coping methods	Full version: 60 items Shortened version: 28	0.72-0.84	Measures across 2 domains: problem-focused coping and emotion-coping. Sample items include “I get upset and let my emotions out.” Test-retest stability has been demonstrated at 1 and 2-year follow-up(Cooper et al., 2008).
Athletic identity	Athletic Identity Measurement Scale (AIMS) (Brewer and Cornelius, 2001)	Athletic self- identity (a source of social support among athletes)	10 items	0.81	Predictive of post-injury psychological distress(Brewer and Cornelius, 2001)
Optimism	Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R) (Scheier et al., 1994)	Individual differences in generalised optimism versus pessimism	10 items	0.78	Used extensively in behavioral, affective and health research. The LOT-R has demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity in comparison to measures of mastery, anxiety, self-esteem, and personality. Scheier and colleagues have reported LOT-R norms of 14.33 (SD = 4.28) in college students and 15.16 (4.05) in cardiac bypass patients (Scheier et al., 1994).
Optimism	Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised (IPQ-R) (Moss-Morris et al., 2002)	Measure cognitive and emotional Representations illness	84 items	0.67-0.89 for individual subscales	8 dimensions: identity, timeline, consequences, personal control, treatment control, illness coherence, cyclical timeline, emotional representation. Test-retest stability at follow-up ranging from 3 weeks to 6 months (Moss-Morris et al., 2002).
Self Efficacy	Sports Injury Rehabilitation Beliefs Survey (SIRBS) (Taylor and May, 1996)	Assesses health beliefs as well as level of sports participation, importance of sport to the athlete	19 items	0.52 (severity subscale) – 0.91 (self efficacy subscale)	Subscales in susceptibility, severity, self-efficacy, and treatment efficacy. Respondents rate the degree to which they agree with statements such as “Being fully recovered from injury is extremely important to me”, and “In order to prevent a recurrence of this injury, my rehabilitation program is essential”
Self Efficacy	Modified Self-Efficacy for Rehabilitation Outcome Scale (SER) (Waldrop et al., 2001)	Perceived ability to perform tasks during injury rehabilitation	12 items	0.94	Respondents rate the degree to which they are certain about their ability to perform rehabilitation-related tasks (e.g., “I believe I can do my therapy regardless of the amount of pain I am experiencing”). Demonstrated convergent validity with Functional Independence Measure (FIM), the Life Orientation Test (LOT), and the Perceived Health Competence Scale (PHCS)(Waldrop et al., 2001)
Self Efficacy	Knee Self-Efficacy Scale (K-SES) (Thomee et al., 2006)	Perceived ability to perform knee-related tasks	22 items	0.78-0.94 for subscales	Four scale subsections. Measures both present self-efficacy and perceived future self-efficacy. Respondents report the degree to which they are certain about items/statements such as “Jumping sideways from one leg to another”, and “How certain are you that your knee will not break”