ArticleInternational wound journal2020
Cross-cultural adaptation, translation, and validation of the Spanish Foot and Ankle Outcome Score questionnaire.
Article in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Functional Ankle Instability in Sport: A Critical Review and Bibliometric Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Transcultural Adaptation and Validation of the Spanish Version of the Visual Analogue Scale for the Foot and Ankle (VASFA).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Spanish Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) for Ankle Fractures.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Foot and Ankle Outcome Instruments: Missing the Target.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2023Review
- Clinical Manifestations, Diagnosis and Management of Synovial Fistula Associated Lateral Ankle Sprain or Instability: A Retrospective Study of 19 Surgically Confirmed Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Association between subtalar articular surface typing and flat foot deformity: which type is more likely to cause flat foot deformity.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Cross-cultural adaptation, translation, and validation of the Spanish Foot and Ankle Outcome Score questionnaire.International wound journal · 2020Article
- Effects of Nurse and Care Worker-led Foot-Care Program on Older People's Foot Conditions: Before and After Intervention Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Spanish Foot and Ankle Outcome Score questionnaire (FAOS-S) may be considered a health evaluation tool with 42 questions for assessing foot health disorders. To date, FAOS has been validated in different languages, but a Spanish version was lacking. Consequently, the purpose of this study was to translate and validate the Spanish version of the FAOS (FAOS es). A suitable method was developed for the translation protocol and cross-cultural validation from Swedish to Spanish. Regarding the total marks from each domain, agreement degrees and confidence were analysed using the Cronbach's α and intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively. In addition, the mean ± SD differences between pretest and posttests were calculated and completed using of the Bland and Altman distribution plots. Excellent agreement between the two versions based on Cronbach's α was demonstrated. Five domains consisting of pain, symptoms of foot disorders, activities of daily living, sports and recreation, and foot and ankle quality of life were added together to obtain the total score. Excellent retest reliability was shown for the total score. Test/retest reliability was excellent for the pain, stiffness, other foot disorder-related symptoms, and quality of life domains. There were no significant differences among any domain (P > .05). There were no statistically significant differences (P = .000) for the mean ± SD differences between pretest and posttests (56.2524 ± 19.064 [51.98-60.52] and 57.45 ± 21.02 [52.74-62.16] points, respectively). Bland and Altman plots or clinically pertinent variations were not statistically significantly different. The FAOS is considered a strong and valid questionnaire with adequate repeatability in the Spanish community.
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.