References
1. Martin R.L., Irrgang J.J., Burdett R.G., Conti S.F., Swearingen J.M.V. Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005; 26 (11): 968–83.
2. Cervera-Garvi P., Ortega-Avila A.B., Morales-Asencio J.M., Cervera-Marin J.A., Martin R.R., Gijon-Nogueron G. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Spanish version of The Foot and Ankle Ability Measures (FAAM-Sp). J Foot Ankle Res. 2017; 10 (1): 39.
3. Martin R.L., Hutt D.M., Wukich D.K. Validity of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) in diabetes mellitus. Foot Ankle Int. 2009; 30 (4): 297–302.
4. Arunakul M., Arunakul P., Suesiritumrong C., Angthong C., Chernchujit B. Validity and reliability of Thai Version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) subjective form. J Med Assoc Thai. 2015; 98 (6): 561–7.
5. Borloz S., Crevoisier X., Deriaz O., Ballabeni P., Martin R.L., Luthi F. Evidence for validity and reliability of a french version of the FAAM. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011; 12 (1): 40.
6. Çelik D., Malkoç M., Martin R. Evidence for reliability, validity and responsiveness of Turkish Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Rheumatol Int. 2016; 36 (10): 1469–76.
7. González-Sánchez M., Li G.Z., Ruiz Muñoz M., Cuesta-Vargas A.I. Foot and ankle ability measure to measure functional limitations in patients with foot and ankle disorders: a Chinese cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Disabil Rehabil. 2017; 39 (21): 2182–9.
8. Mazaheri M., Salavati M., Negahban H., Sohani S.M., Taghizadeh F., Feizi A., et al. Reliability and validity of the Persian version of Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) to measure functional limitations in patients with foot and ankle disorders. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010; 18 (6): 755–9.
9. Moreira T.S., Magalhães L. de C., Silva R.D., Martin R.L., Resende M.A. de. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validity of the Brazilian version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure questionnaire. Disabil Rehabil. 2016; 38 (25): 2479–90.
10. Nauck T., Lohrer H. Translation, cross-cultural adaption and validation of the German version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure for patients with chronic ankle instability. Br J Sports Med. 2011; 45 (10): 785–90.
11. Obionu K.C., Krogsgaard M.R., Hansen C.F., Comins J.D. Dual-panel translation to Danish and Rasch validation of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM-DK). Foot Ankle Surg. 2022; 28 (5): 588–94.
12. Sartorio F., Vercelli S., Bravini E., Bargeri S., Moroso M., Plebani G., et al. [Foot and ankle ability measure: cross-cultural translation and validation of the Italian version of the ADL module (FAAM-I/ADL)]. Med Lav. 2014; 105 (5): 357–65.
13. Uematsu D., Suzuki H., Sasaki S., Nagano Y., Shinozuka N., Sunagawa N., et al. Evidence of validity for the Japanese version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure. J Athl Train. 2015; 50 (1): 65–70.
14. Weel H., Zwiers R., Azim D., Sierevelt I.N., Haverkamp D., van Dijk C.N., et al. Validity and reliability of a Dutch version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 24 (4): 1348–54.
15. Akulova A.I., Gaydukova I.Z., Rebrov A.P. Validation of the EQ-5D-5L version in Russia. Rheumatol Sci Pract. 2018; 56 (3): 351–5.
16. Wild D., Grove A., Martin M., Eremenco S., McElroy S., Verjee-Lorenz A., et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health. 2005; 8 (2): 94–104.