human
***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: The aims of this study were to culturally adapt and vali date the Persian version of Foot and Ankle Outcome Score ( FAOS ) and present data on its psychometric properties for patients with different foot and ankle problems . The Persian version of FAOS was developed after a st and ard forward – backward translation and cultural adaptation process . The sample included 93 patients with foot and ankle disorders who were asked to complete two question naires : FAOS and Short-Form 36 Health Survey ( SF-36 ) . To determine test – retest reliability , 60 r and omly chosen patients completed the FAOS again 2 to 6 days after the first administration . Test – retest reliability and internal consistency were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient ( ICC ) and Cronbach ’s alpha , respectively . To evaluate convergent and divergent validity of FAOS compared to similar and dissimilar concepts of SF-36 , the Spearman ’s rank correlation was used . Dimensionality was determined by assessing item – subscale correlation corrected for overlap . The results of test – retest reliability show that all the FAOS subscales have a very high ICC , ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 . The minimum Cronbach ’s alpha level of 0.70 was exceeded by most subscales . The Spearman ’s correlation coefficient for convergent construct validity fell within 0.32 to 0.58 for the main hypotheses presented a priori between FAOS and SF-36 subscales . For dimensionality , the minimum Spearman ’s correlation coefficient of 0.40 was exceeded by most items . In conclusion , the results of our study show that the Persian version of FAOS seems to be suitable for Iranian patients with various foot and ankle problems especially lateral ankle sprain . Future studies are needed to establish stronger psychometric properties for patients with different foot and ankle problems Objectives For the measurement of  patient-reported outcomes , such as ( health-related ) quality of life , often many measurement instruments exist that intend to measure the same construct . To facilitate instrument selection , our aim was to develop a highly sensitive search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments in PubMed and a more precise search filter that needs less abstract s to be screened , but at a higher risk of missing relevant studies . Methods A r and om sample of 10,000 PubMed records ( 01 - 01 - 1990 to 31 - 12 - 2006 ) was used as a gold st and ard . Studies on measurement properties were identified using an exclusion filter and h and search ing . Search terms were selected from the relevant records in the gold st and ard as well as from 100 systematic review s of measurement properties and combined based on sensitivity and precision . The performance of the filters was tested in the gold st and ard as well as in two validation sets , by calculating sensitivity , precision , specificity , and number needed to read . Results We identified 116 studies on measurement properties in the gold st and ard . The sensitive search filter was able to retrieve 113 of these 116 studies ( sensitivity 97.4 % , precision 4.4 % ) . The precise search filter had a sensitivity of 93.1 % and a precision of 9.4 % . Both filters performed very well in the validation sets . Conclusion The use of these search filters will contribute to evidence -based selection of measurement instruments in all medical fields Background : Selecting optimal patient-reported outcome ( PRO ) instruments is critical to improving the quality of health care . The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability , responsiveness , and efficiency of three PRO measures : the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure – Activity of Daily Living subscale ( FAAM_ADL ) , the Foot Function Index 5-point verbal rating scale ( FFI-5pt ) , and the PROMIS Physical Function computerized adaptive test ( PF CAT ) . Methods : Data were aggregated from 10 clinical sites in the AOFAS ’s National Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Research ( OFAR ) Network from 311 patients who underwent elective surgery for a disorder of the foot or ankle . Patients were administered the FAAM_ADL , FFI-5pt , and PF CAT at their preoperative visit and at 6 months after surgery . Reliabilities were evaluated using a Rasch model . Responsiveness was calculated using paired sample s t test and efficiency was recorded as number of seconds to complete the instrument . Results : Similar reliabilities were found for the three instruments . Item reliabilities for FAAM_ADL , FFI-5pt , and PF CAT were all .99 . Pearson reliabilities for FAAM_ADL , FFI-5pt , and PF CAT were .95 , .93 , and .96 , respectively . On average , patients completed the FAAM_ADL in 179 seconds , the FFI-5pt in 194 seconds , and the PF CAT in 44 seconds , ( P < .001 ) . The PF CAT and FAAM_ADL showed significant improvement ( P = .01 and P = .001 , respectively ) in patients ’ physical function after treatment ; the FFI-5pt did not show improvement . Conclusions : Overall , the PF CAT performed best in terms of reliability , responsiveness , and efficiency in this broad sample of foot and ankle patients . It can be a potential replacement for the conventional PRO measures , but further validation is needed in conjunction with the PROMIS Pain instruments . Level of Evidence : Level I , prospect i ve comparative outcome study Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score ( FAOS ) and provide data on the Minimally Important Change ( MIC ) in patients 1 year after hindfoot and ankle surgery . Methods Prospect i ve pre-operative and 1 year post-operative FAOS scores were collected from 145 patients . A patient ’s global assessment and a longitudinal derived Function Change Score were used as external anchors . To assess responsiveness , effect sizes ( ES ) and St and ardized Response Means ( SRM ) were calculated and hypotheses on their magnitudes were formulated . Additional ROC curve analysis was performed , and the Area Under the Curve ( AUC ) was calculated as a measure of responsiveness . MIC values were estimated using two different methods : ( 1 ) the mean change method and ( 2 ) the optimal cut-off point of the ROC curve . Results Responsiveness was supported by confirmation of 84 % of the hypothesized ES and SRM and almost all AUCs exceeding 0.70 . MIC values ranged from 7 ( symptoms ) to 38 ( sport ) points . They varied between calculation methods and were negatively associated with baseline values . A considerable amount of MIC values did not exceed the smallest detectable change limit , indicating that the FAOS is more suitable at group level than for longitudinally following individual patients . Conclusions The FAOS demonstrated good responsiveness in patients 1 year after hindfoot and ankle surgery . Due to their wide variation , MIC estimates derived in this study should be interpreted with caution . However , these estimates can be of value to facilitate sample size calculation in future studies .Level of evidence Diagnostic study , Level The objective is to develop a Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score ( FAOS ) and to investigate its validity and reliability . The Turkish version of FAOS was developed after the translation and back-translation . The translated version was pretested on 20 patients with rheumatoid arthritis . Then , the Turkish FAOS was administered to 55 patients having foot and ankle problems . They were also evaluated by using the four subscales of the Turkish version of AIMS 2 , and the Turkish version of SF-36 question naire to test validity . Fifty patients filled out the FAOS for second time to determine test – retest reliability . Construct validity was investigated with use of Spearman ’s rank correlation coefficient . Test – retest reliability was assessed with use of the intraclass correlation coefficient ( ICC ) and Cronbach ’s alpha score . The psychometric properties of the Turkish FAOS were generally similar to the original FAOS . The r and om ICC for the five subscales ranged from 0.70 to 0.96 . The Cronbach ’s alpha coefficient ranged from 0.79 to 0.97 . Construct validity of the FAOS was good . The Turkish FAOS correlated with the SF-36 and AIMS 2 scales . The Turkish version of FAOS was valid and reliable instrument to assess the foot and ankle related problems . However , to assess its responsiveness further studies are needed BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE To conduct a pilot study to compare the frequency of errors that accompany single vs. double data extraction , compare the estimate of treatment effect derived from these methods , and compare the time requirements for these methods . METHODS Review ers were r and omized to the role of data extractor or data verifier , and were blind to the study hypothesis . The frequency of errors associated with each method of data extraction was compared using the McNemar test . The data set for each method was used to calculate an efficacy estimate by each method , using st and ard meta-analytic techniques . The time requirement for each method was compared using a paired t-test . RESULTS Single data extraction result ed in more errors than double data extraction ( relative difference : 21.7 % , P = .019 ) . There was no substantial difference between methods in effect estimates for most outcomes . The average time spent for single data extraction  was less than the average time for double data extraction ( relative difference : 36.1 % , P = .003 ) . CONCLUSION In the case that single data extraction is used in systematic review s , review ers and readers need to be mindful of the possibility for more errors and the potential impact these errors may have on effect estimates OBJECTIVE To assess the clinimetric value of the Dutch version of the Foot Function Index ( FFI ) in comparison with the original FFI using verbal rating scales ( FFI-5pt ) rather than visual analog scales ( VAS ) . METHODS A prospect i ve study was performed on 206 patients with nontraumatic forefoot complaints . Scoring , internal consistency , and construct validity of the FFI-5pt were compared with those of the original FFI , which rates all items on VAS . We also studied agreement between the scores at baseline and after one and 8 weeks and the scale scores with regard to sex , age , presence of osteoarthritis , limitation of mobility , bodily pain , and poor physical functioning ( using SF-36 ) . RESULTS Some items were not applicable ; removal of these items left 2 scales ( Pain and Disability ) with high internal consistency ( alpha = 0.88 to 0.94 ) and good agreement between both versions ( intraclass correlation coefficient 0.64 to 0.79 ) . Principal component analysis with varimax rotation using a forced 2 factor model fitted well ( 65 % explained variance ) . Test-retest reliability was high ( ICC 0.70 to 0.83 ) , while the stability over 8 weeks was lower , but still good ( ICC 0.63 to 0.71 ) . Responsiveness to change was low to moderate . However , a small number of patients reported an overall change ( 19 % ) . Scores of patients with limited mobility and poor physical health ( SF-36 ) were higher than those of patients with fewer physical problems , indicating good concurrent validity . CONCLUSION The FFI-5pt is a suitable generic measure . Its clinimetric properties are comparable with those of the original FFI . Its administration and data entry are less time consuming . However , responsiveness has to be more exactly assessed in an intervention study Background There is a clear call for improved patient-centered outcomes . The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score ( FAOS ) is a region-specific patient-reported measure that has been vali date d for a number of foot and ankle diagnoses , but not hallux rigidus . Questions / Purpose sThe aim of this study was to vali date the FAOS in patients with hallux rigidus . Methods From 2007 to 2013 , 211 patients with hallux rigidus ( HR ) were included in the study . For the construct validity portion of the study , 125 patients completed a Short-Form 12 ( SF-12 ) and FAOS survey . Forty additional HR patients were prospect ively given question naires to assess the relevance of each FAOS question as it pertained to their HR . Reliability was assessed in 36 HR patients via administration of a second FAOS an average 1 month following the first . In 55 patients , preoperative and postoperative FAOS scores were compared to determine responsiveness . Results All FAOS subscales demonstrated moderate correlation coefficients with the physical functioning , role physical , bodily pain , and physical health component scores of the SF-12 , with all subscales demonstrating poor correlation with the SF-12 mental health-related domains . Content validity was high for all FAOS scores , with the exception of the daily activities subscale . All subscales achieved acceptable test – retest reliability with correlation coefficients of ≥0.72 . Furthermore , all subscales were rated as responsive to change in postoperative patients ( p < 0.001 ) . Conclusion This study demonstrates the acceptable construct and content validity , reliability , and responsiveness of the FAOS for hallux rigidus . Due to its broad applicability and proven validation across multiple foot and ankle pathologies , the FAOS represents a patient-centered outcome measure that can be reliably used for the assessment of patients with hallux rigidus Background : We examined four commonly used scores , the SF-36 , the  Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale ( AOS )  , the  American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ( AOFAS ) Ankle Hindfoot Score  , and the  Foot Function Index ( FFI )  to determine their responsiveness and validity . Methods : Patients with end stage ankle arthritis were recruited into a prospect i ve multicenter cohort study and baseline and one year outcome scores were compared . The St and ardized Response Mean and Effect Size for the AOS , AOFAS , and FFI were calculated and the three region- or disease-specific scores were compared with the SF-36 to determine their criterion validity . Results : All four scores showed acceptable responsiveness , and when using the vali date d SF-36 as the st and ard the three region or disease specific scores all showed similar criterion validity . Conclusion : All four scores are responsive and can be considered for use in this population . The objective component of the AOFAS Ankle Hindfoot Score may make it harder to perform than the other three 
    Output:
    
agent
More evidence was available for the measurement properties of the FAOS and the FAAM , but overall evidence supporting all measurement properties is not yet sufficient .
***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: The aims of this study were to culturally adapt and vali date the Persian version of Foot and Ankle Outcome Score ( FAOS ) and present data on its psychometric properties for patients with different foot and ankle problems . The Persian version of FAOS was developed after a st and ard forward – backward translation and cultural adaptation process . The sample included 93 patients with foot and ankle disorders who were asked to complete two question naires : FAOS and Short-Form 36 Health Survey ( SF-36 ) . To determine test – retest reliability , 60 r and omly chosen patients completed the FAOS again 2 to 6 days after the first administration . Test – retest reliability and internal consistency were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient ( ICC ) and Cronbach ’s alpha , respectively . To evaluate convergent and divergent validity of FAOS compared to similar and dissimilar concepts of SF-36 , the Spearman ’s rank correlation was used . Dimensionality was determined by assessing item – subscale correlation corrected for overlap . The results of test – retest reliability show that all the FAOS subscales have a very high ICC , ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 . The minimum Cronbach ’s alpha level of 0.70 was exceeded by most subscales . The Spearman ’s correlation coefficient for convergent construct validity fell within 0.32 to 0.58 for the main hypotheses presented a priori between FAOS and SF-36 subscales . For dimensionality , the minimum Spearman ’s correlation coefficient of 0.40 was exceeded by most items . In conclusion , the results of our study show that the Persian version of FAOS seems to be suitable for Iranian patients with various foot and ankle problems especially lateral ankle sprain . Future studies are needed to establish stronger psychometric properties for patients with different foot and ankle problems Objectives For the measurement of  patient-reported outcomes , such as ( health-related ) quality of life , often many measurement instruments exist that intend to measure the same construct . To facilitate instrument selection , our aim was to develop a highly sensitive search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments in PubMed and a more precise search filter that needs less abstract s to be screened , but at a higher risk of missing relevant studies . Methods A r and om sample of 10,000 PubMed records ( 01 - 01 - 1990 to 31 - 12 - 2006 ) was used as a gold st and ard . Studies on measurement properties were identified using an exclusion filter and h and search ing . Search terms were selected from the relevant records in the gold st and ard as well as from 100 systematic review s of measurement properties and combined based on sensitivity and precision . The performance of the filters was tested in the gold st and ard as well as in two validation sets , by calculating sensitivity , precision , specificity , and number needed to read . Results We identified 116 studies on measurement properties in the gold st and ard . The sensitive search filter was able to retrieve 113 of these 116 studies ( sensitivity 97.4 % , precision 4.4 % ) . The precise search filter had a sensitivity of 93.1 % and a precision of 9.4 % . Both filters performed very well in the validation sets . Conclusion The use of these search filters will contribute to evidence -based selection of measurement instruments in all medical fields Background : Selecting optimal patient-reported outcome ( PRO ) instruments is critical to improving the quality of health care . The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability , responsiveness , and efficiency of three PRO measures : the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure – Activity of Daily Living subscale ( FAAM_ADL ) , the Foot Function Index 5-point verbal rating scale ( FFI-5pt ) , and the PROMIS Physical Function computerized adaptive test ( PF CAT ) . Methods : Data were aggregated from 10 clinical sites in the AOFAS ’s National Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Research ( OFAR ) Network from 311 patients who underwent elective surgery for a disorder of the foot or ankle . Patients were administered the FAAM_ADL , FFI-5pt , and PF CAT at their preoperative visit and at 6 months after surgery . Reliabilities were evaluated using a Rasch model . Responsiveness was calculated using paired sample s t test and efficiency was recorded as number of seconds to complete the instrument . Results : Similar reliabilities were found for the three instruments . Item reliabilities for FAAM_ADL , FFI-5pt , and PF CAT were all .99 . Pearson reliabilities for FAAM_ADL , FFI-5pt , and PF CAT were .95 , .93 , and .96 , respectively . On average , patients completed the FAAM_ADL in 179 seconds , the FFI-5pt in 194 seconds , and the PF CAT in 44 seconds , ( P < .001 ) . The PF CAT and FAAM_ADL showed significant improvement ( P = .01 and P = .001 , respectively ) in patients ’ physical function after treatment ; the FFI-5pt did not show improvement . Conclusions : Overall , the PF CAT performed best in terms of reliability , responsiveness , and efficiency in this broad sample of foot and ankle patients . It can be a potential replacement for the conventional PRO measures , but further validation is needed in conjunction with the PROMIS Pain instruments . Level of Evidence : Level I , prospect i ve comparative outcome study Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score ( FAOS ) and provide data on the Minimally Important Change ( MIC ) in patients 1 year after hindfoot and ankle surgery . Methods Prospect i ve pre-operative and 1 year post-operative FAOS scores were collected from 145 patients . A patient ’s global assessment and a longitudinal derived Function Change Score were used as external anchors . To assess responsiveness , effect sizes ( ES ) and St and ardized Response Means ( SRM ) were calculated and hypotheses on their magnitudes were formulated . Additional ROC curve analysis was performed , and the Area Under the Curve ( AUC ) was calculated as a measure of responsiveness . MIC values were estimated using two different methods : ( 1 ) the mean change method and ( 2 ) the optimal cut-off point of the ROC curve . Results Responsiveness was supported by confirmation of 84 % of the hypothesized ES and SRM and almost all AUCs exceeding 0.70 . MIC values ranged from 7 ( symptoms ) to 38 ( sport ) points . They varied between calculation methods and were negatively associated with baseline values . A considerable amount of MIC values did not exceed the smallest detectable change limit , indicating that the FAOS is more suitable at group level than for longitudinally following individual patients . Conclusions The FAOS demonstrated good responsiveness in patients 1 year after hindfoot and ankle surgery . Due to their wide variation , MIC estimates derived in this study should be interpreted with caution . However , these estimates can be of value to facilitate sample size calculation in future studies .Level of evidence Diagnostic study , Level The objective is to develop a Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score ( FAOS ) and to investigate its validity and reliability . The Turkish version of FAOS was developed after the translation and back-translation . The translated version was pretested on 20 patients with rheumatoid arthritis . Then , the Turkish FAOS was administered to 55 patients having foot and ankle problems . They were also evaluated by using the four subscales of the Turkish version of AIMS 2 , and the Turkish version of SF-36 question naire to test validity . Fifty patients filled out the FAOS for second time to determine test – retest reliability . Construct validity was investigated with use of Spearman ’s rank correlation coefficient . Test – retest reliability was assessed with use of the intraclass correlation coefficient ( ICC ) and Cronbach ’s alpha score . The psychometric properties of the Turkish FAOS were generally similar to the original FAOS . The r and om ICC for the five subscales ranged from 0.70 to 0.96 . The Cronbach ’s alpha coefficient ranged from 0.79 to 0.97 . Construct validity of the FAOS was good . The Turkish FAOS correlated with the SF-36 and AIMS 2 scales . The Turkish version of FAOS was valid and reliable instrument to assess the foot and ankle related problems . However , to assess its responsiveness further studies are needed BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE To conduct a pilot study to compare the frequency of errors that accompany single vs. double data extraction , compare the estimate of treatment effect derived from these methods , and compare the time requirements for these methods . METHODS Review ers were r and omized to the role of data extractor or data verifier , and were blind to the study hypothesis . The frequency of errors associated with each method of data extraction was compared using the McNemar test . The data set for each method was used to calculate an efficacy estimate by each method , using st and ard meta-analytic techniques . The time requirement for each method was compared using a paired t-test . RESULTS Single data extraction result ed in more errors than double data extraction ( relative difference : 21.7 % , P = .019 ) . There was no substantial difference between methods in effect estimates for most outcomes . The average time spent for single data extraction  was less than the average time for double data extraction ( relative difference : 36.1 % , P = .003 ) . CONCLUSION In the case that single data extraction is used in systematic review s , review ers and readers need to be mindful of the possibility for more errors and the potential impact these errors may have on effect estimates OBJECTIVE To assess the clinimetric value of the Dutch version of the Foot Function Index ( FFI ) in comparison with the original FFI using verbal rating scales ( FFI-5pt ) rather than visual analog scales ( VAS ) . METHODS A prospect i ve study was performed on 206 patients with nontraumatic forefoot complaints . Scoring , internal consistency , and construct validity of the FFI-5pt were compared with those of the original FFI , which rates all items on VAS . We also studied agreement between the scores at baseline and after one and 8 weeks and the scale scores with regard to sex , age , presence of osteoarthritis , limitation of mobility , bodily pain , and poor physical functioning ( using SF-36 ) . RESULTS Some items were not applicable ; removal of these items left 2 scales ( Pain and Disability ) with high internal consistency ( alpha = 0.88 to 0.94 ) and good agreement between both versions ( intraclass correlation coefficient 0.64 to 0.79 ) . Principal component analysis with varimax rotation using a forced 2 factor model fitted well ( 65 % explained variance ) . Test-retest reliability was high ( ICC 0.70 to 0.83 ) , while the stability over 8 weeks was lower , but still good ( ICC 0.63 to 0.71 ) . Responsiveness to change was low to moderate . However , a small number of patients reported an overall change ( 19 % ) . Scores of patients with limited mobility and poor physical health ( SF-36 ) were higher than those of patients with fewer physical problems , indicating good concurrent validity . CONCLUSION The FFI-5pt is a suitable generic measure . Its clinimetric properties are comparable with those of the original FFI . Its administration and data entry are less time consuming . However , responsiveness has to be more exactly assessed in an intervention study Background There is a clear call for improved patient-centered outcomes . The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score ( FAOS ) is a region-specific patient-reported measure that has been vali date d for a number of foot and ankle diagnoses , but not hallux rigidus . Questions / Purpose sThe aim of this study was to vali date the FAOS in patients with hallux rigidus . Methods From 2007 to 2013 , 211 patients with hallux rigidus ( HR ) were included in the study . For the construct validity portion of the study , 125 patients completed a Short-Form 12 ( SF-12 ) and FAOS survey . Forty additional HR patients were prospect ively given question naires to assess the relevance of each FAOS question as it pertained to their HR . Reliability was assessed in 36 HR patients via administration of a second FAOS an average 1 month following the first . In 55 patients , preoperative and postoperative FAOS scores were compared to determine responsiveness . Results All FAOS subscales demonstrated moderate correlation coefficients with the physical functioning , role physical , bodily pain , and physical health component scores of the SF-12 , with all subscales demonstrating poor correlation with the SF-12 mental health-related domains . Content validity was high for all FAOS scores , with the exception of the daily activities subscale . All subscales achieved acceptable test – retest reliability with correlation coefficients of ≥0.72 . Furthermore , all subscales were rated as responsive to change in postoperative patients ( p < 0.001 ) . Conclusion This study demonstrates the acceptable construct and content validity , reliability , and responsiveness of the FAOS for hallux rigidus . Due to its broad applicability and proven validation across multiple foot and ankle pathologies , the FAOS represents a patient-centered outcome measure that can be reliably used for the assessment of patients with hallux rigidus Background : We examined four commonly used scores , the SF-36 , the  Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale ( AOS )  , the  American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ( AOFAS ) Ankle Hindfoot Score  , and the  Foot Function Index ( FFI )  to determine their responsiveness and validity . Methods : Patients with end stage ankle arthritis were recruited into a prospect i ve multicenter cohort study and baseline and one year outcome scores were compared . The St and ardized Response Mean and Effect Size for the AOS , AOFAS , and FFI were calculated and the three region- or disease-specific scores were compared with the SF-36 to determine their criterion validity . Results : All four scores showed acceptable responsiveness , and when using the vali date d SF-36 as the st and ard the three region or disease specific scores all showed similar criterion validity . Conclusion : All four scores are responsive and can be considered for use in this population . The objective component of the AOFAS Ankle Hindfoot Score may make it harder to perform than the other three 
    Output:
    