ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2026
Safeguarding Data Integrity in Online Podiatry Research: Understanding and Managing Non-Genuine Participation.
Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2026. 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
Online research methods have become increasingly common in podiatry, offering efficient, low cost and convenient data collection. Emerging evidence from online studies suggests that the integrity of online research is being compromised by participants who are not genuine: for example, they may not have the relevant health condition they are claiming to have or they may not be taking the trial medication as instructed. In health research, the consequences of non-genuine participants are significant, including unreliable data, wasted time and funding, researcher distress, loss of participant trust and, in some cases, cancelled projects. Growing awareness of fraudulent participation and reports of these challenges highlights the need for structured approaches designed to safeguard data integrity and the trustworthiness of results. In the United Kingdom, the University of Nottingham has recently published practical guidance for researchers and ethics committees on handling potential non-genuine participants. The aim of this commentary is to raise awareness of the risks posed by non-genuine participation in online research and to provide a summary of the recently published practical strategies for researchers to safeguard the integrity of their data.
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.