SynthesisAnnals of medicine2025
The efficacy of ultrasound for plantar fasciitis, a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Chronic plantar fasciitis: Effectiveness of stretching, ultrasound, and phonophoresis. A randomized clinical trial].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasound (US) has been widely used in the treatment of plantar fasciitis (PF); however, its therapeutic effect remains unclear.
objectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of ultrasound (US) on pain intensity and foot function in patients with PF.
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and other databases were systematically searched from inception to July 2024. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.
resultsThirteen trials were performed. There was no difference in pain relief between US alone and no treatment, as was US plus conventional physical exercises (CPE) compared with CPE alone. In the comparison between the US plus CPE group and the other interventions plus CPE group, there was a statistically significant difference in pain intensity (MD = 0.78, 95%CI= 0.12 to 1.44,
conclusionWhether applied alone or in combination with CPE, US cannot reduce pain intensity in patients with PF. However, US in combination with CPE may improve foot function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.