ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022
Comparative Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Proximal Hamstring Injuries: A Systematic Review.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Validation of a Short Version of the Parisian Hamstring Avulsion Score (PHAS): The Short PHAS.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Pre-operative activity level and a sport or recreation injury mechanism are associated with 2-year clinical outcome after proximal hamstring tendon repair.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Rehabilitation Following a Distal Semitendinosus Excision in a Collegiate American Football Player: A Resident's Case Report.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2026Article
- A Case of When Splits Should be Left to Gymnasts.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Review
- Validation of the Parisian Hamstring Avulsion Score (PHAS) in the Evaluation and Follow-up of Patients Operated for Proximal Hamstring Avulsion.The American journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: There is controversy regarding which patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) should be used for proximal hamstring tendon injuries. Hypothesis: It was hypothesized that (1) most (>50%) of the questions on the 13 most common PROMs for proximal hamstring injuries would demonstrate extensive overlap in the health domains and question categories and (2) each of the PROMs would contain a variable distribution of questions within each health domain. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: We conducted a literature review through PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL and identified the 13 most common PROMs for proximal hamstring injuries: Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Marx activity rating scale (MARS), 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12), Tegner activity scale (TAS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT), Proximal Hamstring Injury Questionnaire (PHIQ), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), University of California, Los Angeles activity score (UCLA), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), Sydney Hamstring Origin Rupture Evaluation (SHORE), and Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS). All PROM questions were sorted into 5 health domains (pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, sports, and mindset) and further divided into question categories if they referred to similar tasks or aspects of health. Questions in the same health domain and question category were considered overlapping, and those within a health domain that did not fit into a question category were considered unique. For each PROM, we analyzed the distribution of questions within particular health domains and question categories as well as the amount of overlapping and unique questions. Results: Of the 165 questions evaluated, 116 (70.3%) were overlapping, and 49 (29.7%) were unique. The SF-12 contained the most unique questions (9/12 [75.0%]). The MARS, TAS, SANE, and UCLA had 0 unique questions. The PHIQ and iHOT-12 contained questions in all 5 health domains. The PHAT, SHORE, and NAHS contained questions in every health domain except mindset. The LEFS, MARS, SF-12, TAS, mHHS, SANE, UCLA, and HOS contained questions in ≤3 health domains. Conclusion: The evaluated PROMs had a high degree of overlapping questions (≥50%) and demonstrated a statistically significant variance in the distribution of questions within each health domain.
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.