No abstract

The International Ankle Consortium is an international community of researchers and clinicians whose primary scholastic purpose is to promote scholarship and dissemination of research-informed knowledge related to pathologies of the ankle complex. The constituents of the International Ankle Consortium and other similar organizations have yet to properly define the clinical phenomenon known as chronic ankle instability (CAI) and its related characteristics for consistent patient recruitment and advancement of research in this area. Although research on CAI and awareness of its impact on society and healthcare systems have grown substantially in the last 2 decades, the inconsistency in participant/patient selection criteria across studies presents a potential obstacle to addressing the problem properly. This major gap within the literature limits the ability to generalize this evidence to the target patient population. Therefore, there is a need to provide standards for patient/participant selection criteria in research focused on CAI, with justifications using the best available evidence. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2013;43(8):585–591. doi:10.2519/jospt.2013.0303

Lateral ankle sprains (LASs) are the most prevalent musculoskeletal injury in physically active populations. They also have a high prevalence in the general population and pose a substantial healthcare burden. The recurrence rates of LASs are high, leading to a large percentage of patients with LAS developing chronic ankle instability. This chronicity is associated with decreased physical activity levels and quality of life and associates with increasing rates of post-traumatic ankle osteoarthritis, all of which generate financial costs that are larger than many have realised. The literature review that follows expands this paradigm and introduces emerging areas that should be prioritised for continued research, supporting a companion position statement paper that proposes recommendations for using this summary of information, and needs for specific future research.

The aim of this study is to estimate the ratio of male and female participants in Sports and Exercise Medicine research. Original research articles published in three major Sports and Exercise Medicine journals (Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, British Journal of Sports Medicine and American Journal of Sports Medicine) over a three-year period were examined. Each article was screened to determine the following: total number of participants, the number of female participants and the number of male participants. The percentage of females and males per article in each of the journals was also calculated. Cross tabulations and Chi-square analysis were used to compare the gender representation of participants within each of the journals. Data were extracted from 1382 articles involving a total of 6,076,580 participants. A total of 2,366,968 (39%) participants were female and 3,709,612 (61%) were male. The average percentage of female participants per article across the journals ranged from 35% to 37%. Females were significantly under-represented across all of the journals (χ(2) = 23,566, df = 2, p < 0.00001). In conclusion, Sports and Exercise Medicine practitioners should be cognisant of sexual dimorphism and gender disparity in the current literature.

While research on chronic ankle instability (CAI) and awareness of its impact on society and health care systems has grown substantially in the last 2 decades, the inconsistency in participant or patient selection criteria across studies presents a potential obstacle to addressing the problem properly. This major gap within the literature limits the ability to generalize this evidence to the target patient population. Therefore, there is a need to provide standards for patient or participant selection criteria in research focused on CAI with justifications using the best available evidence. The International Ankle Consortium provides this position paper to present and discuss an endorsed set of selection criteria for patients with CAI based on the best available evidence to be used in future research and study designs. These recommendations will enhance the validity of research conducted in this clinical population with the end goal of bringing the research evidence to the clinician and patient.