↓ Skip to main content

A consensus definition and rating scale for minimalist shoes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#3 of 757)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
193 tweeters
facebook
10 Facebook pages
googleplus
4 Google+ users
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
274 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A consensus definition and rating scale for minimalist shoes
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13047-015-0094-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Francois Esculier, Blaise Dubois, Clermont E. Dionne, Jean Leblond, Jean-Sébastien Roy

Abstract

While minimalist running shoes may have an influence on running biomechanics and on the incidence of overuse injuries, the term "minimalist" is currently used without standardisation. The objectives of this study were to reach a consensus on a standard definition of minimalist running shoes, and to develop and validate a rating scale that could be used to determine the degree of minimalism of running shoes, the Minimalist Index (MI). For this modified Delphi study, 42 experts from 11 countries completed four electronic questionnaires on an optimal definition of minimalist shoes and on elements to include within the MI. Once MI was developed following consensus, 85 participants subjectively ranked randomly assigned footwear models from the most to the least minimalist and rated their degree of minimalism using visual analog scales (VAS), before evaluating the same footwear models using MI. A subsample of thirty participants reassessed the same shoes on another occasion. Construct validity and inter- and intra-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]; Gwet's AC1) of MI were evaluated. The following definition of minimalist shoes was agreed upon by 95 % of participants: "Footwear providing minimal interference with the natural movement of the foot due to its high flexibility, low heel to toe drop, weight and stack height, and the absence of motion control and stability devices". Characteristics to be included in MI were weight, flexibility, heel to toe drop, stack height and motion control/stability devices, each subscale carrying equal weighing (20 %) on final score. Total MI score was highly correlated with VAS (r = 0.91). A significant rank effect (p < 0.001) confirmed the MI's discriminative validity. Excellent intra- and inter-rater reliability was found for total MI score (ICC = 0.84-0.99) and for weight, stack height, heel to toe drop and flexibility subscales (AC1 = 0.82-0.99), while good inter-rater reliability was found for technologies (AC1 = 0.73). This standardised definition of minimalist shoes developed by an international panel of experts will improve future research on minimalist shoes and clinical recommendations. MI's adequate validity and reliability will allow distinguishing running shoes based on their degree of minimalism, and may help to decrease injuries related to footwear transition.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 193 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 267 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 59 22%
Student > Master 57 21%
Researcher 25 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 8%
Lecturer 13 5%
Other 55 20%
Unknown 42 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 72 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 53 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 44 16%
Engineering 12 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 26 9%
Unknown 61 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 198. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2022.
All research outputs
#152,120
of 21,944,731 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#3
of 757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,901
of 253,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,944,731 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them