SynthesisJournal of foot and ankle research2026
Exercise Therapy for Chronic Ankle Instability: Which Modality for Which Deficit? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis 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. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exercise Therapy for Chronic Ankle Instability: Which Modality for Which Deficit? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2026Pooled it
- The Additive Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Exercise-Based Rehabilitation Interventions on Balance, Ankle Kinematics, and Muscle Activity in Individuals With Ankle Instability: A Systematic Review.Health science reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveChronic ankle instability (CAI) involves heterogeneous sensorimotor deficits. Evidence comparing exercise modalities for specific deficits is limited, impeding personalised rehabilitation. To determine the relative efficacy of exercise interventions and create an evidence-based framework for deficit-specific prescription in CAI.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Searches of 9 electronic databases from inception to 1 September 2025. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials comparing exercise interventions against no intervention for sensorimotor outcomes in CAI individuals. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently conducted the screening, and will independently extract the data into an Excel spreadsheet. Methodological quality was assessed using PEDro criteria, and bias analysis was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2. Sensitivity analysis and I
resultsFifty-eight studies (n = 2097) were included. Of the included studies, 28 were rated as low risk of bias, 19 as unclear risk and 11 as high risk. Balance training provided comprehensive benefits, improving patient-reported function, dynamic balance, joint position sense, concentric strength and functional performance. Strength training enhanced patient-reported function, dynamic balance and concentric strength. 3D, stroboscopic and neuromuscular training improved patient-reported function and dynamic balance; stroboscopic training also benefited joint position sense. Vibration training improved only dynamic balance. No interventions significantly improved force sense or eccentric strength.
conclusionExercise modalities have distinct efficacy profiles in CAI. Balance training is foundational, but therapy can be personalised by framework optimises management.
trial registrationThis systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024606683).
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.