A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive
We read with interest the recent paper by Groarke et al. (Quality of life in individuals with chronic foot conditions: a cross sectional observational study. The Foot (2012) doi:10.1016/i.foot.2011.11.007). The paper ended by stating that 'there is no scoring system for the foot and ankle that...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2012
|
| _version_ | 1826291720533311488 |
|---|---|
| author | Dawson, J Boller, I Doll, H Jenkinson, C Lavis, G Sharp, R Cooke, P |
| author_facet | Dawson, J Boller, I Doll, H Jenkinson, C Lavis, G Sharp, R Cooke, P |
| author_sort | Dawson, J |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | We read with interest the recent paper by Groarke et al. (Quality of life in individuals with chronic foot conditions: a cross sectional observational study. The Foot (2012) doi:10.1016/i.foot.2011.11.007). The paper ended by stating that 'there is no scoring system for the foot and ankle that is valid, repeatable and reliable'. This statement is misleading. The authors could have made reference to the patient-reported Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ). The MOXFQ has been subjected to more rigorous testing of its measurement properties than is the case for most instruments, and has been demonstrated to be acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive in the context of foot or ankle surgery. © 2012. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T03:03:40Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:b1c97045-59cb-4cdb-8ca1-ba1b7628d3e5 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T03:03:40Z |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:b1c97045-59cb-4cdb-8ca1-ba1b7628d3e52022-03-27T04:06:42ZA scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsiveJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:b1c97045-59cb-4cdb-8ca1-ba1b7628d3e5EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2012Dawson, JBoller, IDoll, HJenkinson, CLavis, GSharp, RCooke, PWe read with interest the recent paper by Groarke et al. (Quality of life in individuals with chronic foot conditions: a cross sectional observational study. The Foot (2012) doi:10.1016/i.foot.2011.11.007). The paper ended by stating that 'there is no scoring system for the foot and ankle that is valid, repeatable and reliable'. This statement is misleading. The authors could have made reference to the patient-reported Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ). The MOXFQ has been subjected to more rigorous testing of its measurement properties than is the case for most instruments, and has been demonstrated to be acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive in the context of foot or ankle surgery. © 2012. |
| spellingShingle | Dawson, J Boller, I Doll, H Jenkinson, C Lavis, G Sharp, R Cooke, P A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive |
| title | A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive |
| title_full | A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive |
| title_fullStr | A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive |
| title_full_unstemmed | A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive |
| title_short | A scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable, reliable, valid and responsive |
| title_sort | scoring system for the foot and ankle that is acceptable reliable valid and responsive |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dawsonj ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT bolleri ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT dollh ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT jenkinsonc ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT lavisg ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT sharpr ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT cookep ascoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT dawsonj scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT bolleri scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT dollh scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT jenkinsonc scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT lavisg scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT sharpr scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive AT cookep scoringsystemforthefootandanklethatisacceptablereliablevalidandresponsive |