SynthesisJournal of athletic training2022
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Pediatric Patients With Sport-Related Injuries: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of athletic training, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining Minimal Clinically Important Difference Thresholds for Pediatric Knee Surgeries.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Patient reported outcomes in pediatric physical therapy: a scoping review and evidence map.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Review
- Methodological quality of 100 recent systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments: an overview of reviews.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Review
- An Activity Scale for All Youth Athletes? Clinical Considerations for the HSS Pedi-FABS.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Patient-reported outcome measures as an outcome variable in sports medicine research.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite a call to incorporate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into all aspects of health care, little is known about which instruments are best suited for a pediatric patient population with sport-related injury. The objective of this article was to perform a systematic review of the currently available evidence to determine which PROMs were used for pediatric patients with sport-related injuries and identify the associated psychometric properties and considerations for clinical utility. We conducted a literature search for articles on PROMs used in the pediatric population through electronic databases and a manual search of reference lists and authors between from inception to 2020. Articles were grouped based on the PROM(s) included, and considerations for clinical utility and psychometric properties were extracted from each article. Thirty-nine articles were included in this review, from which 22 PROMs were identified: 12 PROMs were developed specifically for the pediatric population, 4 were modified versions of an adult scale, and 6 were adult measures used in a pediatric population. Of the PROMs included in this review, the Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire for Children and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory were the most comprehensive in their development and assessment. Several outcome measures used for pediatric patients had missing or inadequate measurement properties and considerations for clinical utility, particularly in regard to readability, responsiveness, and interpretability. Clinicians and researchers should consider a measure's feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and psychometric properties when selecting a PROM for use with the pediatric population.
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.