ArticlePloS one2024
Listening to children with lower limb loss: Rationale, design, and protocol for delivery of a novel globally applicable research toolkit-Prosthetic user needs, quality of life, pain, and physical function.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- User-Reported Comfort, Functionality, and Satisfaction Among Pediatric Lower Limb Amputees Using Conventional Prosthetic Devices: A Multi-Center Cross-Sectional Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of Physical Growth and Development on Paediatric Lower-Limb Prosthetic Provision: Prosthetist Perspectives and Clinical Casefile Analysis From Cambodia.Advances in rehabilitation science and practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRehabilitation after childhood lower limb loss is complex and dependent on multiple stakeholders and environmental factors. While research with adults underscores the importance of involving prosthetic limb users and caregivers in discussions to drive innovation, children are often excluded or not effectively engaged. This protocol lays out the development and implementation protocol for an internationally applicable research toolkit which has been designed and evaluated around the essential presence of the child. Research domains span their unique prosthetic needs, quality of life, pain, and mobility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Cohorts of children in contrasting environments were identified (Cambodia, Gaza Strip, and the UK) to provide a comprehensive global understanding of the child with lower limb loss. A literature review revealed a lack of appropriate tools for identifying paediatric prosthetic user requirements leading to the development of novel interview guides for each key stakeholder: child, caregiver, and prosthetist. The child's guide centred around enjoyment and engagement using card games and activities. A panel of experts in paediatric limb loss and mental health rigorously reviewed the guides. Guides were integrated with existing validated measures for quality of life, pain, and mobility to form a comprehensive toolkit. The toolkit was successfully piloted with 5 children, their families, and 2 prosthetists. This protocol lays out the toolkit rationale and implementation plan (Jan 2023 to Dec 2025). This work offers the opportunity for this cohort to enjoyably engage with research that seeks to radically improve prospects for all children living with limb loss. The outlined best practices ensure ethical considerations when working with vulnerable cohorts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved to cover implementation at all geographical locations as well as the researcher institutions. Results will be disseminated through national and international conferences, as well as through manuscripts in leading peer-reviewed journals.
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.