ArticleBMJ open2019
Psychometric properties of knee proprioception tests targeting healthy individuals and those with anterior cruciate ligament injury managed with or without reconstruction: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Remnant preservation may improve proprioception after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2022Pooled it
- Properties of tests for knee joint threshold to detect passive motion following anterior cruciate ligament injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Properties of Knee Joint Position Sense Tests for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2021Review
- The accuracy of MRI in the diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament injury.Annals of translational medicine · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury affects knee proprioception and sensorimotor control and might contribute to an increased risk of a second ACL injury and secondary knee osteoarthritis. Therefore, there is a growing need for valid, reliable and responsive knee proprioception tests. No previous study has comprehensively reviewed all the relevant psychometric properties (PMPs) of these tests together. The aim of this review protocol is to narrate the steps involved in synthesising the evidence for the PMPs of specific knee proprioception tests among individuals with an ACL injury and knee-healthy controls. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses will be followed to report the review. A combination of four conceptual groups of terms-(1) construct (knee proprioception), (2) target population (healthy individuals and those with an ACL injury managed conservatively or with a surgical reconstruction), (3) measurement instrument (specific knee proprioception tests) and (4) PMPs (reliability, validity and responsiveness)-will be used for electronic databases search. PubMed, AMED, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ProQuest will be searched from their inception to November 2018. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full text articles, extract data and perform risk of bias assessment using the updated COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments risk of bias checklist for the eligible studies. A narrative synthesis of the findings and a meta-analysis will be attempted as appropriate. Each PMP of knee proprioception tests will be classified as 'sufficient', 'indeterminate' or 'insufficient'. The overall level of evidence will be ascertained using an established set of criteria. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval or patient consent is not required for a systematic review. The review findings will be submitted as a series of manuscripts for peer-review and publication in scientific journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018108014.
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.