The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evidence of Validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM)
Abstract
Background: There is no universally accepted instrument that can be used to evaluate changes in self-reported physical function for individuals with leg, ankle, and foot musculoskeletal disorders. The objective of this study was to develop an instrument to meet this need: the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Additionally, this study was designed to provide validity evidence for interpretation of FAAM scores. Methods: Final item reduction was completed using item response theory with 1027 subjects. Validity evidence was provided by 164 subjects that were expected to change and 79 subjects that were expected to remain stable. These subjects were given the FAAM and SF-36 to complete on two occasions 4 weeks apart. Results: The final version of the FAAM consists of the 21-item activities of daily living (ADL) and 8-item Sports subscales, which together produced information across the spectrum ability. Validity evidence was provided for test content, internal structure, score stability, and responsiveness. Test retest reliability was 0.89 and 0.87 for the ADL and Sports subscales, respectively. The minimal detectable change based on a 95% confidence interval was ±5.7 and ±-12.3 points for the ADL and Sports subscales, respectively. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA and ROC analysis found both the ADL andSports subscales were responsive to changes in status ( p < 0.05). The minimal clinically important differences were 8 and 9 points for the ADL and Sports subscales, respectively. Guyatt responsive index and ROC analysis found the ADL subscale was more responsive than general measures of physical function while the Sports subscale was not. The ADL and Sport subscales demonstrated strong relationships with the SF-36 physical function subscale ( r = 0.84, 0.78) and physical component summary score ( r = 0.78, 0.80) and weak relationships with the SF-36 mental function subscale ( r = 0.18, 0.11) and mental component summary score ( r = 0.05, −0.02). Conclusions: The FAAM is a reliable, responsive, and valid measure of physical function for individuals with a broad range of musculoskeletal disorders of the lower leg, foot, and ankle.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
Comparing correlated correlation coefficients
Meng, X.-L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.172 · Cited by 2,472
Cited by
An Updated Model of Chronic Ankle Instability
Hertel, J., & Corbett, R. O. (2019) · Journal of Athletic Training · doi:10.4085/1062-6050-344-18 · Cited by 836
Chronic Ankle Instability: Evolution of the Model
Hiller, C. E., Kilbreath, S. L., & Refshauge, K. M. (2011) · Journal of Athletic Training · doi:10.4085/1062-6050-46.2.133 · Cited by 371
Taylor, A. M., Phillips, K., Patel, K. V., Turk, D. C., Dworkin, R. H., Beaton, D., Clauw, D. J., Gignac, M. A. M., Markman, J. D., Williams, D. A., et al. (2016) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000577 · Cited by 208
Cook, J., Hislop, J., Adewuyi, T., Harrild, K., Altman, D., Ramsay, C., Fraser, C., Buckley, B., Fayers, P., Harvey, I., et al. (2014) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta18280 · Cited by 194
Digital Rehabilitation for Acute Ankle Sprains: Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study
Correia, F. D., Molinos, M., Neves, C., Janela, D., Carvalho, D., Luis, S., Francisco, G. E., Lains, J., & Bento, V. (2021) · JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · doi:10.2196/31247 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Martin, R. L., Irrgang, J. J., Burdett, R. G., Conti, S. F., & Swearingen, J. M. V.
- Venue
- Foot & Ankle International
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 968-983
- ISSN
- 1071-1007 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7876
- OpenAlex
- W1862349858
- Cited by
- 1,145
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evidence of Validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/107110070502601113
- The paper
- Martin, R. L., Irrgang, J. J., Burdett, R. G., Conti, S. F., & Swearingen, J. M. V. (2005). Evidence of Validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot & Ankle International. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110070502601113
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.