ArticleActa orthopaedica2017
Minimally important change, measurement error, and responsiveness for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient-reported experience measures.Health services research · 2019Pooled it
- The Benefit of Repairing the Deltoid Ligament in Unstable Ankle Fractures: Patient-Reported Functional Outcome and Radiological Stability Measurements; a Clinical Trial Protocol.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2025Trial
- Comparative outcomes of foot cast and short leg cast in pseudo-Jones avulsion fracture: a single blinded randomized controlled trial.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2019Trial
- 1-year results after surgery for flexible adult-acquired flatfoot deformity: a cohort study based on 190 patients from the Swedish Foot and Ankle Surgery Register.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Patient satisfaction and patient-reported outcome measures after primary ankle arthrodesis: 2-year results from the Swedish Ankle Registry.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Observational
- Distal chevron osteotomies enhance patient-reported outcomes for all severity grades of hallux valgus: a cohort study.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes Before and After Hallux Valgus Surgery: 2-Year Results From a National Registry Study.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Validity, reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the EFAS-DK PROM: an observational cohort study of Danish speaking foot and ankle patients.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Observational
- Morton's Neuroma or Intermetatarsal Bursitis-A Prospective Diagnostic Study of Intermetatarsal Pain.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Foot and Ankle Outcome Instruments: Missing the Target.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2023Review
- Patient-reported outcome for 17,648 patients in 5 different Swedish orthopaedic quality registers before and 1 year after surgery: an observational study.Acta orthopaedica · 2023Observational
- Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
- Outcomes of trabecular metal total ankle replacement: a longitudinal observational cohort study of 239 consecutive cases from the Swedish Ankle Registry.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Observational
- Association of Delayed Surgery for Ankle Fractures and Patient-Reported Outcomes.Foot & ankle international · 2022Article
- Antiresorptive treatment and talar collapse after displaced fractures of the talar neck: a long-term follow-up of 19 patients.Acta orthopaedica · 2021Observational
- Traditional Approach vs Posterior Approach for Ankle Fractures Involving the Posterior Malleolus.Foot & ankle international · 2021Article
- Patient-reported outcomes of joint-preserving surgery for moderate hallux rigidus: a 1-year follow-up of 296 patients from Swefoot.Acta orthopaedica · 2021Article
- Determination of the smallest detectable change (SDC) and the minimal important difference (MID) for the Small Fiber Neuropathy Screening List (SFNSL) in sarcoidosis.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2018Article
- Good outcome scores and high satisfaction rate after primary total ankle replacement.Acta orthopaedica · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose - Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to evaluate results in orthopedic surgery. To enhance good responsiveness with a PROM, the minimally important change (MIC) should be established. MIC reflects the smallest measured change in score that is perceived as being relevant by the patients. We assessed MIC for the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) used in Swedish national registries. Patients and methods - Patients with forefoot disorders (n = 83) or hindfoot/ankle disorders (n = 80) completed the SEFAS before surgery and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months also, a patient global assessment (PGA) scale-as external criterion-was completed. Measurement error was expressed as the standard error of a single determination. MIC was calculated by (1) median change scores in improved patients on the PGA scale, and (2) the best cutoff point (BCP) and area under the curve (AUC) using analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs). Results - The change in mean summary score was the same, 9 (SD 9), in patients with forefoot disorders and in patients with hindfoot/ankle disorders. MIC for SEFAS in the total sample was 5 score points (IQR: 2-8) and the measurement error was 2.4. BCP was 5 and AUC was 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7-0.9). Interpretation - As previously shown, SEFAS has good responsiveness. The score change in SEFAS 6 months after surgery should exceed 5 score points in both forefoot patients and hindfoot/ankle patients to be considered as being clinically relevant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.