Background: Outcome measures (OMs) are essential components of evidence- based practice as they help in implementing interventions and assessing changes in a patient's status before and after treatment. However, many therapists do not utilize OMs in their practice, and research on the factors that influence physical therapists' decisions regarding the use of OMs primarily consists of quantitative or survey-based studies. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to select research studies on OMs use among physical therapists through a systematic review, identify questionnaire characteristics, and assess the quality of items collection and research. Design: A systematic review. Methods: This study systematically collected survey studies on the use of OMs from five databases (KMBase, RISS, KCI, Pubmed, and Cochrane) based on the criteria of PRISMA's systematic review flowchart. The quality of the studies was assessed using the AXIS Tool. Results: A total of eight studies were selected. In most of the studies, the questionnaires were developed internally, validated through preliminary research, and reliability testing was not conducted. The items used within OMs were divided into 10 categories, with the highest frequency of questions centering around how to use OMs, and the lowest frequency regarding work environment and reasons. All eight studies were determined to be of good quality. Conclusion: The collected OMs questionnaires revealed variations in the item frequency. Future qualitative research and participant feedback are needed to develop a consistent questionnaire and validate its validity and reliability.

Background: Korea citation index (KCI) enhances the quality of journals by securing a management system for domestic journals and strengthening the international competitiveness of excellent domestic journals. Errors in studies, papers, and investigations of statistical methods have been reported worldwide in the medical field. However, there is a lack of studies on statistical methods and error investigations in physical therapy journals in Korea. Objectives: To investigated the frequency of statistical methods and research errors in physical therapy journal articles evaluated by KCI. Design: Review. Methods: Ten journals classified as physical therapy journals by December 2021, which are candidate journals or higher, were targeted. The study focused on original articles published from 2017 to 2021 and investigated the frequency of statistical methods used, sample size calculations, result tables, effect sizes, and confidence intervals. Results: Statistical methods used in physical therapy studies in Korean journals mainly employed group comparative analysis. However, in most cases, the basis for sampling, effect size, and confidence interval were not presented, even though most of the results tables were included. Conclusion: This study allowed us to examine the most frequently used statistical methods in Korean physical therapy studies and assess the reporting status of sample size calculations, result tables, effect sizes, and confidence intervals. Efforts are needed to publish high-quality papers to improve the quality of Korean physical therapy journals.