ReviewJournal of patient-reported outcomes2019
A systematic review of the measurement properties of patient reported outcome measures used for adults with an ankle fracture.
Review in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measures of attributes of locomotor capacity in older people: a systematic literature review following the COSMIN methodology.Age and ageing · 2023Pooled it
- Fractures of the posterior malleolus: a systematic review and analysis of patient-reported outcome scale selection.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of ankle fractures in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Pooled it
- Ankle fractures: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures and their measurement properties.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical relevance of current patient-reported outcome measures for ankle fracture: surgeons' perspective.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2024Article
- Assessing Functional Ankle Instability in Sport: A Critical Review and Bibliometric Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Comparing immediate and delayed weight bearing in patients with ankle open reduction internal fixation-A protocol for feasibility randomised controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Surgery: Evaluation after Minimally Invasive Reduction and Percutaneous K-Wires Fixation for Intra-Articular Calcaneal Fractures.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A systematic review of outcome reporting in clinical trials of distal tibia and ankle fractures : the need for a core outcome set.Bone & joint open · 2022Article
- Co-producing a multi-stakeholder Core Outcome Set for distal Tibia and Ankle fractures (COSTA): a study protocol.Trials · 2021Article
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnkle fractures are painful and debilitating injuries that pose a significant burden to society and healthcare systems. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used outcome measures in clinical trials of interventions for ankle fracture but there is little evidence on their validity and reliability. This systematic review aims to identify and appraise evidence for the measurement properties of ankle specific PROMs used in adults with an ankle fracture using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) methodology.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL online databases for evidence of measurement properties of ankle specific PROMs. Articles were included if they assessed or described the development of the PROM in adults with ankle fracture. Articles were ineligible if they used the PROM to assess the measurement properties of another instrument. Abstracts without full articles and conference proceedings were ineligible, as were articles that adapted the PROM under evaluation without any formal justification of the changes as part of a cross-cultural validation or translation process. Two reviewers completed the screening. To assess methodological quality we used COSMIN risk of bias checklist and summarised evidence using COSMIN quality criteria and a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality and extracted the data for a sample of articles.
resultsThe searches returned a total of 377 articles. From these, six articles were included after application of eligibility criteria. These articles evaluated three PROMs: A-FORM, OMAS and AAOS. The A-FORM had evidence of a robust development process within the patient population, however lacks post-formulation testing. The OMAS showed sufficient levels of reliability, internal consistency and construct validity. The AAOS showed low quality evidence of sufficient construct validity.
conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to support the recommendation of a particular PROM for use in adult ankle fracture research based on COSMIN methodology. Further validation of these outcome measures is required in order to ensure PROMs used in this area are sufficiently valid and reliable to assess treatment effects. This would enable high quality, evidenced-based management of adults with ankle fracture.
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.