Observational studyJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
Validity, reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the EFAS-DK PROM: an observational cohort study of Danish speaking foot and ankle patients.
Observational study in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study is an external evaluation of the Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) EFAS-DK developed by the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS). The evaluation included a test of the psychometric properties. METHODOLOGY: From October 2019 to September 2022, 101 patients undergoing elective foot or ankle surgery completed questionnaires (EFAS-DK, SEFAS-DK, EQ-5D-5L) prior to surgery and 6 months post-surgery. A subgroup of patients completed a retest. A foot-healthy group control group was added. Testing covered construct validity with hypothesis testing, floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha), test-retest reliability (ICC 2.1), effect size (ES), Standardized Response Mean (SRM), Smallest Detectable Change (SDC) and Minimal Important Change (MIC).
resultsModerate construct validity with 59% confirmed hypothesis. High content validity, no floor ceiling effects. Cronbach's alpha 0.88, ICC 0.93. ES and SRM were both 1.06. SDC 4 and MIC 6. Control group score changes was insignificant.
conclusionEFAS-DK is a valid, reliable, and responsive foot and ankle PROM score. EFAS-DK can detect a clinically subjective relevant change score of 6 (25% of the total scale), which makes it useful for implementation in the clinic when evaluating patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery. Comparison with a control group showed results that significantly differ from the patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IIa prospective observational analytic cohort study.
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.