Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28174604›Full record

ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2017

Challenging the foundations of the clinical model of foot function: further evidence that the root model assessments fail to appropriately classify foot function.

Hannah L Jarvis, Christopher J Nester, Peter D Bowden, Richard K Jones

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research: the first ten years.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hannah L JarvisSchool of Health Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Christopher J NesterSchool of Health Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Peter D BowdenSchool of Health Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Richard K JonesSchool of Health Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
University of Salford · GBManchester Metropolitan University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Root model of normal and abnormal foot function remains the basis for clinical foot orthotic practice globally. Our aim was to investigate the relationship between foot deformities and kinematic compensations that are the foundations of the model.

methodsA convenience sample of 140 were screened and 100 symptom free participants aged 18-45 years were invited to participate. The static biomechanical assessment described by the Root model was used to identify five foot deformities. A 6 segment foot model was used to measure foot kinematics during gait. Statistical tests compared foot kinematics between feet with and without foot deformities and correlated the degree of deformity with any compensatory motions.

resultsNone of the deformities proposed by the Root model were associated with distinct differences in foot kinematics during gait when compared to those without deformities or each other. Static and dynamic parameters were not correlated.

conclusionsTaken as part of a wider body of evidence, the results of this study have profound implications for clinical foot health practice. We believe that the assessment protocol advocated by the Root model is no longer a suitable basis for professional practice. We recommend that clinicians stop using sub-talar neutral position during clinical assessments and stop assessing the non-weight bearing range of ankle dorsiflexion, first ray position and forefoot alignments and movement as a means of defining the associated foot deformities. The results question the relevance of the Root assessments in the prescription of foot orthoses.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaComputer SimulationFemaleFootFoot DeformitiesGaitHumansMaleMiddle AgedRange of Motion, ArticularYoung AdultAssessmentDynamicNeutralStatic

Identifiers

PMID28174604
PMCPMC5291999
OpenAlexW2585888652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.