ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2023
Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Lower Extremity Research.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Defining region and duration-specific substantial clinical benefit values for the simplified Chinese lower extremity functional scale.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
- Activities of Daily Living and Quality of Life After Orthopaedic Surgery for Haemophilic Arthropathy: A Scoping Review.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of HemophiliaArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A large number of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed for specific lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies. However, a consensus as to which PROMs are recommended for use in evaluating treatment outcomes for patients with hip, knee, ankle and/or foot pathology based on the strength of their psychometric properties is lacking. Objective: To identify PROMs that are recommended in systematic reviews (SRs) for those with orthopaedic hip, knee, foot, and ankle pathologies or surgeries and identify if these PROMs are used in the literature. Study design: Umbrella Review. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDisucs and Scopus were searched for SRs through May 2022. A second search was done to count the use of PROMs in seven representative journals from January 2011 through May 2022.SRs that recommended the use of PROMs based on their psychometric properties were included in the first search. SRs or PROMs not available in the English were excluded. The second search included clinical research articles that utilized a PROM. Case reports, reviews, and basic science articles were excluded. Results: Nineteen SRs recommended 20 PROMs for 15 lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies or surgeries. These results identified consistency between recommended PROMs and utilization in clinical research for only two of the 15 lower extremity pathologies or surgeries. This included the use of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score to assess outcomes (HAGOS) for those with knee osteoarthritis and groin pain, respectively. Conclusion: A discrepancy was found between the PROMs that were recommended by SRs and those used to assess clinical outcomes in published research. The results of this study will help to produce more uniformity with the use of PROMs that have the most appropriate psychometric properties when the reporting treatment outcomes for those with extremity pathologies. Level of evidence: 3a.
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.