Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35716224›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2023

Ankle fractures: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures and their measurement properties.

Michael Quan Nguyen, Ingvild Dalen, Marjolein Memelink Iversen, Knut Harboe, Aksel Paulsen

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Clinical relevance of current patient-reported outcome measures for ankle fracture: surgeons' perspective.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Foot and Ankle Outcome Instruments: Missing the Target.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael Quan NguyenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Helse Stavanger HF, Stavanger, Norway. n.michael.quan@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0270-9518
Ingvild DalenDepartment of Quality and Health Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
Marjolein Memelink IversenCentre on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Department of Research and Development, Haukeland University Hospital, Helse Bergen HF, Bergen, Norway.
Knut HarboeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Helse Stavanger HF, Stavanger, Norway.
Aksel PaulsenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Helse Stavanger HF, Stavanger, Norway.
Stavanger University Hospital · NOWestern Norway University of Applied Sciences · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAnkle fractures are commonly occurring fractures, especially in the aging population, where they often present as fragility fractures. The disease burden and economic costs to the patient and society are considerable. Choosing accurate outcome measures for the evaluation of the management of ankle fractures in clinical trials facilitates better decision-making. This systematic review assesses the evidence for the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in the evaluation of adult patients with ankle fractures.

methodsSearches were performed in CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline and Google Scholar from the date of inception to July 2021. Studies that assessed the measurement properties of a PROM in an adult ankle fracture population were included. The included studies were assessed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews of PROMs.

resultsIn total, 13 different PROMs were identified in the 23 included articles. Only the Ankle Fracture Outcome of Rehabilitation Measure (A-FORM) presented some evidence on content validity. The Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) and Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) displayed good evidence of construct validity and internal consistency. The measurement properties of the OMAS, LEFS and SEFAS were most studied.

conclusionThe absence of validation studies covering all measurement properties of PROMs used in the adult ankle fracture population precludes the recommendation of a specific PROM to be used in the evaluation of this population. Further research should focus on validation of the content validity of the instruments used in patients with ankle fractures.

Indexed as

Ankle FracturesAdultAgedAnkleHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAnkle fracturesMeasurement propertiesPatient reported outcome measuresSystematic reviewValidity

Identifiers

PMID35716224
PMCPMC9829578
OpenAlexW4283073323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.