ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Considerations in the selection of patient-reported outcome measures for assessing function related to chronic ankle instability.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. 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.
- Push-off asymmetry and kinetic strategies in functional ankle instability during continuous vertical jump tasks.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Ankle sprain history and clinical outcome have limited influence on walking and running biomechanics among runners: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
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
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential tools in evaluating chronic ankle instability (CAI), capturing subjective experiences such as "giving way" and instability. However, no standardized guidelines exist for selecting PROMs in CAI, resulting in limited comparability across studies and clinical settings. This paper highlights four key considerations for selecting PROMs in assessing CAI: recalibration in populations including individuals with CAI, identifiability of ankle instability, detectability of CAI characteristics, and cross-cultural adaptability. It emphasizes that CAI-specific PROMs should demonstrate high pertinence, accurately distinguishing CAI from other conditions, and effectively detecting symptom changes over time. Furthermore, widely adopted PROMs may offer greater credibility and applicability. Addressing these considerations is crucial for improving CAI diagnosis, treatment evaluation, and advancing patient-centered care.
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.