## 3 Results  
A total of 894 references were identified through the application of search strategies. Following the screening process, a total of 14 studies were deemed suitable for inclusion in the review, as illustrated in Figure 1. Of the 14 selected articles, 12 (85.71%) are descriptive observational studies, while the remaining 2 (14.28%) are randomised clinical trials. Of the twelve descriptive observational studies, eight are cohort studies (66.66%), one is a cross-sectional study (8.33%), and three are case-control articles (25%). With the exception of one article in Spanish, all of the articles have been published in English. The total number of patients included in the study was 2419, comprising two studies conducted in a military setting, with a total of 1000 patients. The male recruits  
Figure 1: PRISMA study selection flowchart. were between the ages of 17 and 22, were in good health, and were members of the military [27; 28]. The studies comprising smaller samples included between four and seven patients. The studies in question represent pilot studies on sports shoes or analytical models of wearable devices. The remaining studies have sample sizes ranging from 13 to 61 patients, with one study comprising a sample of 148 patients [29]. The total sample size is 2207 men and 202 women aged 18 years and older. Of the total sample, 2190 individuals were identified as healthy patients, while 229 were diagnosed with diabetes. A total of four studies included diabetic patients, while two studies made reference to the specific type of diabetes. One study makes reference to subjects with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, while another refers to volunteers with type 2 diabetes. The studies included were evaluated using the PEDro scale, and it was determined that the quality of the analysed studies is of a good standard, with an average rating of 6.28 points. Two articles were rated 9 points (14.28%), one article was rated 7 points (7.14%), eight articles were rated 6 points (57.14%), and the remaining articles were rated 5 points (21.42%). Despite the relative heterogeneity of the studies under analysis, a number of consistent quality criteria have emerged across the board. Table 2 illustrates that the majority of studies employed a random sampling technique, with the exception of five studies that utilised convenience sampling. This approach may potentially limit the external validity of the results. However, all articles satisfied the criteria set out in items 10 and 11 of the statistical information, thereby addressing the potential for bias associated with convenience sampling and enhancing the external validity of the results, ensuring their applicability to the population of interest. All studies complied with the stipulations set forth in item 9, which required the presentation of results for all subjects who received treatment or were assigned to the control group. In cases where this was not possible, data for at least one principal outcome were analysed in accordance with the \"intention to treat\" principle. This approach serves to reinforce the internal validity of the results, furnishing sufficient statistical information to inform clinical decision making. Only two studies employed concealed allocation and masked subjects and assessors who measured at least one outcome. In all studies, none of the investigators who administered the therapy were blinded. In view of the evolution of scientific production within the field under examination, as reflected in the data from the various databases, it is evident that over the 21-year period in question, a total of only seven articles have been published (between 1996 and 2017). However, an upward trend is observable in the period between 2019 and 2023, which encompasses the remaining seven articles included in this review. Furthermore, the subject matter demonstrates a notable increase between 2021 and 2022.