ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023
High reproducibility of a novel supported anterior drawer test for diagnosing ankle instability.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is the anterior drawer test still valuable for diagnosing mechanical ankle instability in clinical practice and research?Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe manual traditional anterior drawer test (ADT) is essential for deciding the treatment for chronic ankle instability, but it has been shown to have a comparatively low reproducibility and accuracy, especially in less experienced hands. To clarify the inter-examiner reproducibility, we compared the actual distance of anterior translation between junior and senior examiners in ADT. We also evaluated the diagnostic abilities of traditional ADT, and a novel modified ADT (supported ADT).
methodsThirty ankles were included in this study, and ankle instability was defined using stress radiography. All subjects underwent two methods of manual ADT by junior and senior examiners, and ankle instability was judged in a blinded fashion. The anterior drawer distance was calculated from the lengthening measured using a capacitance-type sensor device.
resultsThe degree of anterior translation determined by the junior examiner was significantly lower than that determined by the senior examiner when traditional ADT was performed (3.3 vs. 4.5 mm, P = 0.016), but there was no significant difference in anterior translation between the two examiners when supported ADT was performed (4.6 vs. 4.1 mm, P = 0.168). The inter-examiner reliability of supported ADT was higher than that of traditional ADT. For the junior examiner, the diagnostic accuracy of supported ADT was higher than that of traditional ADT (sensitivity, 0.40 vs. 0.80; specificity, 0.75 vs. 0.80).
conclusionSupported ADT may have the advantage of being a simple manual test of ankle instability with less error between examiners.
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.