Background. The recent emphasis on using “evidence based medicine” for decision-making in patient care has prompted many publishers to mention the level of evidence of articles in their journals. The “quality” of a journal may thus be reflected by the proportion of articles with high levels of evidence and assist it achieve citations and therefore an Impact Factor. The purpose of this study was to survey published Foot and Ankle literature to evaluate changes in the level of evidence over ten years. Methods. Articles from Foot and Ankle International, JBJS Br, JBJS Am, Foot and Foot and Ankle Surgery were used. We looked at the years 2000 and 2010 and ranked the articles by a five-point level of evidence scale, according to guidelines from the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. 498 articles were ranked. Studies of animals, studies of cadavera, basic-science articles were excluded. Results. For both years 2000 and 2010 combined, 63.5% of the articles were therapeutic, 25.5% were prognostic, 10.6% were diagnostic, and 0.8% were economic. In 2000 the ratings were 1.3% as Level I, 5.8% as Level II, 11.9% as Level III, 44.7% as Level IV and 36.3% as level V. In 2010 the ratings were 2.9% as Level I, 9.6% as Level II, 15.4% as Level III, 38.2% as Level IV and 33.8% as level V. Conclusion. The literature in foot and ankle surgery has responded to the demand for more evidence-based medicine with an increase in level I and II papers but the rate of change has been slow. The majority of evidence remains in the level IV and V