How We Assess Shoes
Current reviews analyse published footwear specifications and sources. We do not have original shoe-test photographs, bench measurements or wear-test records supporting them. This page explains the limits of that evidence and the records any future physical testing would require.
By Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS · Double board-certified foot and ankle surgeon
Written and medically reviewed by Dr. Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS · Last reviewed 8 October 2026
On this page
Authorship and current evidence
Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS
Tom Biernacki is the named author of this publication. His clinical credentials do not substitute for a product test record or establish that an independent clinician reviewed every article. Current reviews are specification analyses; documented original bench testing and wear testing are not available for them.
Published measurements
A specification figure should identify its manufacturer, named retailer or independent laboratory source, the exact model and version, and the sample size or width when known. Different measurement methods and samples may produce different figures. Published measurements are not measurements made by Podiatrist Tested.
| Figure | Scope to record |
|---|---|
| Weight | Grams per shoe, with the source’s size, width and sample when supplied. |
| Heel stack height | Millimetres at the heel, using the source’s stated method. |
| Forefoot stack height | Millimetres at the forefoot, from the same source and sample as a compared heel figure. |
| Drop | The source’s stated heel-to-forefoot difference; do not combine incompatible samples to calculate it. |
| Internal toe-box width | The source’s measurement position, method, size and width. It is not a guarantee of fit. |
| Internal toe-box depth | The source’s internal dimension and method, when available. An external height is not an internal-fit measurement. |
Unknown measurements remain unknown. A published claim should be linked to its source and described with that source’s limits. Manufacturer statements, independent laboratory results and our interpretation should be distinguishable.
The Orthotic Volume Rating
No original orthotic-fit assessment is documented for the current reviews. An Orthotic Volume Rating must not be inferred from a removable insole, a wide-size label or a manufacturer’s description. Any future rating would need a recorded shoe and orthotic sample, the fitting procedure and its limits; it would not guarantee fit for every foot or orthosis.
Future physical-testing protocol
This is a proposed record-keeping protocol for future work, not a description of completed tests. Current reviews have no documented original shoe-test photographs, bench measurements or wear-test logs.
-
Identify the sample
Record the exact model, version, labelled sex, size and width, acquisition method and test dates. Photograph the actual pair and preserve the original files.
-
Record the method and observations
For any bench measurement, record the equipment, units, measurement position, procedure and results. Physical handling observations should not be presented as validated safety tests or as proof of clinical benefit.
-
Record wear and its limits
A wear assessment would identify the tester, duration, distance, surfaces and contemporaneous observations. Comfort, durability and fit observations apply to that tester and sample. A single wear assessment would not be a clinical trial.
Scores and ratings
Current specification analyses do not establish original comfort, durability, stability or overall test scores. Published stack height, drop, weight or width alone cannot validate those outcomes. The earlier nine-criterion weights and numeric thresholds are not documented results or a validated scoring system.
A comparison may explain attributed design features, published dimensions and practical fit considerations. It should separate those facts from interpretation and leave untested outcomes unknown. Any future original score would need a published rubric, its supporting records and a clear explanation of its limitations.
Seal status
A specification analysis is not eligible for a physical-testing seal. There are no documented original test records supporting a seal for the current reviews. The Podiatrist Tested name is the publication’s name, not evidence that an individual shoe was physically tested.
Any future seal would need disclosed criteria and the underlying original records before it could be described as earned. Our editorial policy does not offer paid scores, rankings, a seal or placement.
Evidence labels and their requirements
Specification analysis describes the current reviews. Bench Tested and Wear Tested are reserved for future work only if its original records actually support those labels.
Current published-source analysis
Uses attributed information from manufacturers, named retailers, independent laboratories and research. No documented original physical testing, original test score or seal.
Recorded physical measurements
Would require an identified pair, original photographs and recorded procedures and results. It would not establish wear comfort, durability or clinical effectiveness.
Recorded use of an identified pair
Would require contemporaneous tester, date, distance, surface and observation records, in addition to any claimed bench results. Findings would be limited to the actual tester and sample.
What we do not know
Published design and specification information does not establish how a shoe will feel on your foot, how long it will last for you, or whether it will improve a medical condition. Manufacturer and laboratory samples may differ from the pair you buy. No original wear experience or patient outcome is established by the current reviews.
Shoes, money and corrections
How we get the shoes
Current specification analyses do not document acquisition or physical testing of an original pair. If a pair is acquired for future testing, its source should be disclosed with the actual test records.
How we make money
Affiliate commissions may be earned from qualifying purchases through our links. Our policy is to base editorial choices on the evidence and fit considerations rather than commission rates.
When we are wrong
Models and published sources change. A specification analysis should identify the version discussed and distinguish a source update from a physical retest. Report an error and we will correct substantive claims with a dated note.
Common questions
Do brands pay for a review, a score, or the seal?
Our policy prohibits brand payments for a test result, score, ranking, seal or placement. We earn affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases. Current reviews are specification analyses with no documented original test score or earned seal.
What is the Orthotic Volume Rating?
It is a proposed physical-fit rating that would require a recorded shoe and orthotic assessment. That original assessment is not documented for the current reviews. A specification analysis cannot establish the rating or guarantee that an orthotic will fit.
Why do some shoes have no score at all?
Current reviews are specification analyses using attributed published sources. Without original physical-test and wear records, an original test score or seal is not established. A manufacturer or independent laboratory figure should be identified as that source’s result.
How many miles before a durability score is final?
No original mileage or durability test is documented for the current reviews. Any future wear assessment would need its distance, dates, surfaces, sample and observations recorded; a fixed mileage alone would not make a durability claim final.
What happens when a shoe is redesigned?
Published-source analysis should be updated for the new version with the source and change identified. A physical retest should be claimed only when that test was actually performed and recorded.
Clarification (7 October 2026): Clarified which testing tier includes physical measurements, orthotic-fit ratings and wear records, and how manufacturer, retailer and independent laboratory figures are attributed. This update does not report new physical testing.
Correction (8 October 2026): Made the current specification-analysis status explicit because original physical-test and wear records are not documented. Removed unsupported accounts of completed measurement, scoring, shoe acquisition and universal review. The physical-testing process described here is a proposed future protocol.
Read the source and its limits
Current reviews should identify published specifications, their source and any unknowns. A product image or author credential is not an original test record.