SynthesisJournal of foot and ankle research2026
Reporting and Utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures in the Evaluation of Foot Orthoses Treatment: A Systematic Review.
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. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrently, there is no patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) specifically for evaluating foot orthoses treatments. This led us to ask the following question: What is the quality of the validated foot and ankle PROMs used to evaluate foot orthosis interventions? To do so, we analyzed the psychometric properties of these PROMs and identified the most widely used and those with the best measurement properties.
methodsTwo literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The methodological quality of the articles was assessed using the updated COSMIN checklist. Psychometric evidence for the properties investigated in the articles was assessed using the updated COSMIN criteria for good psychometric properties. Ratings of methodological quality and psychometric evidence were synthesized using the method of Schellingerhout et al. (2012).
resultsA total of 205 articles were included, identifying 11 validated PROMs for foot and ankle used in the evaluation of foot orthoses. The Foot Function Index (FFI) and the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) were the most commonly used, whereas the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles tendon (VISA-A) questionnaire demonstrated the best measurement properties.
conclusionThe VISA-A, the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and the Revised Foot Function Index (FFI-R) appear to be useful PROMs for evaluating foot orthoses treatments; however, more evidence is needed to make more robust and reliable statements.
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.