SynthesisBMJ open2017
Patient-reported outcome measures for patients with meniscal tears: a systematic review of measurement properties and evaluation with the COSMIN checklist.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of measurement properties of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET).Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of Knee Quality of Life 26-Item Questionnaire into Spanish in Patellofemoral Pain.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Whole-body vibration decreases pain and cartilage degeneration in male and female mice with osteoarthritis.Pain reports · 2026Article
- Research Trends of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopedic Medical Practices: A Bibliometric and Visualized Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Patient's subjective knee function 3-5 years following partial meniscectomy or meniscus repair compared to a normal population: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2022Article
- The translated Danish version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) is reliable and responsive.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Article
- Mesenchymal stem cells for enhancing biological healing after meniscal injuries.World journal of stem cells · 2021Review
- An Up-to-Date Review of the Meniscus Literature: A Systematic Summary of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2020Review
- Article
- Statistical validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) according to the COSMIN checklist.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- The results of meniscal allograft transplantation surgery: what is success?BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMeniscal tears occur frequently in the population and the most common surgical treatment, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, is performed in approximately two million cases worldwide each year. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarise and critically appraise the evidence for the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients with meniscal tears.
designA systematic review was undertaken. Data on reported measurement properties were extracted and the quality of the studies appraised according to Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments. DATA SOURCES: A search of MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and PsycINFO, unlimited by language or publication date (last search 20 February 2017). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Development and validation studies reporting the measurement properties of PROMs in patients with meniscal tears were included.
results11 studies and 10 PROMs were included. The overall quality of studies was poor. For measurement of symptoms and functional status, there is only very limited evidence supporting the selection of either the Lysholm Knee Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form or the Dutch version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. For measuring health-related quality of life, only limited evidence supports the selection of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET). Of all the PROMs evaluated, WOMET has the strongest evidence for content validity.
conclusionFor patients with meniscal tears, there is poor quality and incomplete evidence regarding the validity of the currently available PROMs. Further research is required to ensure these PROMs truly reflect the symptoms, function and quality of life of patients with meniscal tears. PROPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017056847.
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.