ArticlePloS one2025
Use of standardized outcome measures among physical therapists in the United States: A cross-sectional survey study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Planning a Clinical Practice Guideline Revision for a Core Set of Outcome Measures in Adults Undergoing Neurologic Physical Therapy, Part 2: Determining Stakeholders' Uptake and Recommendations.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Planning a Clinical Practice Guideline Revision for a Core Set of Outcome Measures in Adults Undergoing Neurologic Physical Therapy, Part 1: Assessing Dissemination and Scholarly Uptake.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Implementation of a gait and balance battery of outcome measures in an inpatient rehabilitation hospital.Physical therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As value-based care becomes increasingly central to healthcare delivery in the United States, physical therapists (PTs) are expected to use outcome measures (OMs) to demonstrate meaningful improvements in patient health. Although OMs play a critical role in supporting value-based practice, prior research suggests they are not routinely used, and limited attention has been given to how resource availability may influence their implementation, particularly for performance-based tests. This study aimed to assess PTs' use of OMs, including their perceptions of value, motivations for use, and the resources available for administration. An online survey was used to evaluate outcomes measurement practices of PTs in the United States. Invitations were mailed to a random sample of American Physical Therapy Association members. Frequencies and percentages were calculated. Nearly all respondents (n = 514) used OMs with their patients, but performance-based tests were used more than self-report surveys (97% and 83%, respectively). Most respondents agreed that OMs were within their scope of practice (>95%) and could be administered with knowledge they possessed (>88%). However, less than 50% agreed OMs are administered in a standardized manner across the profession. Most respondents (89%) indicated that performance-based tests "help me make clinical decisions," but fewer (61%) said the same about self-report surveys. Respondents were also willing to dedicate more time to performance-based tests than self-report surveys (up to 20 and 10 minutes, respectively). Most respondents (>80%) indicated they had smaller rooms and short hallways (≤10m) for OM administration. Results of this study indicate PTs in the United States have the knowledge, time, and space to administer many of the OMs recommended for use in physical therapy. While PTs use both types of OMs, performance-based tests are often perceived to have greater clinical value. Obtaining consensus on specific protocols for administering OMs may help to address concerns about the lack of standardization across the profession.
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.