Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38956878›Full record

ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2024

Development of a research agenda for medical grade footwear in the Netherlands: A multidisciplinary multiphase project to determine the key research questions to advance scientific knowledge in the field.

Jaap J van Netten, Rutger Dahmen, Fred Holtkamp, Johanna P Aussems, Gaston Jansen, Esther Mik, Sicco A Bus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Jaap J van NettenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6420-6046
Rutger DahmenAmsterdam Rehabilitation Research Center/Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Fred HoltkampDepartment of Allied Health Professions, Fontys University of Applied Science, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Johanna P AussemsMerem Medische Revalidatie, Hilversum, The Netherlands.
Gaston JansenLoopvisie b.v., Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Esther MikLivit Orthopedie, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sicco A BusDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8357-9163

Funding

OFOM Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe field of medical grade footwear is dynamic. Originally, a field where individual knowledge, expertise and skills determined the footwear and its outcomes, now becoming a more evidence-based and data-driven field with protocols and systems in place to create appropriate footwear. However, scientific evidence concerning medical grade footwear is still limited. Evidently, all stakeholders, from patients to pedorthists to rehabilitation physicians, will profit from a larger evidence-base in this field. A widely supported research agenda is an essential first step to advance and facilitate new knowledge.

methodsWe formed a multidisciplinary team and followed the methodology from Dutch medical societies for the development of a research agenda on medical grade footwear. This consisted of seven steps: (1) inventory of relevant questions with users and professionals; (2) analyses of responses; (3) analyses of existing knowledge and evidence; (4) formulating research questions; (5) prioritising research questions by users and professionals; (6) finalising the research agenda and (7) implementing the research agenda.

resultsIn phase 1, 109 participants completed a survey, including 50% pedorthists, 6% rehabilitation physicians and 3% users. Participants provided 228 potential research questions. In phases 2-4, these were condensed to 65 research questions. In phase 5, 152 participants prioritised these 65 research questions, including 50% pedorthists, 13% rehabilitation physicians and 9% users. In phase 6, the final research agenda was created, with 26 research questions, categorised based on the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health 'process description assistive devices'. In phase 7, an implementation meeting was held with over 50 stakeholders (including users and professionals), resulting in seven applications for research projects based on one or more research questions from the research agenda.

conclusionsThis research agenda structures and guides knowledge development within the field of medical grade footwear in the Netherlands and elsewhere. We expect that this will help to stimulate the field to tackle the research questions prioritised and with that to advance scientific knowledge in this field.

Indexed as

ShoesAdultBiomedical ResearchFemaleHumansMaleNetherlandsOrthotic DevicesSurveys and Questionnaireschildrenconsensus development conferencesdiabetes mellitusfoot deformitiesfoot diseasesfoot ulcerorthotic devicesrehabilitationrheumatoid arthritisshoes

Identifiers

PMID38956878
PMCPMC11633342

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.