---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: kelly <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:39 AM
Subject: [CO-CURE] RES: Fatigue Scales And Chronic Fatigue Syndrome:
Issues Of Sensitivity And Specificity
Note: Some fatigue scales such as the Chalder Scale have a ceiling effect
rendering it ineffective specifically for measuring post exertional fatigue
Disability Studies Quarterly, Vol 31, No 1 (2011)
Fatigue Scales And Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Issues Of Sensitivity And
*Leonard Jason, Jason Meredyth Evans, Molly Brown, Nicole Porter, Abigail
Brown, Jessica Hunnell, Valerie Anderson, Athena Lerch*
Few studies have explored issues of sensitivity and specificity for using
the fatigue construct to identify patients meeting chronic fatigue syndrome
In this article, we examine the sensitivity and specificity of several
fatigue scales that have attempted to define severe fatigue within CFS.
Using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, we found most
scales and sub-scales had either significant specificity and/or sensitivity
However, the post-exertional subscale of the ME/CFS Fatigue Types
Questionnaire (Jason, Jessen, et al., 2009) was the most promising in terms
of specificity and sensitivity.
Among the more traditional fatigue scales, Krupp, LaRocca, Muir-Nash, and
Steinberg's (1989) Fatigue Severity Scale had the best ability to
differentiate CFS from healthy controls.
Selecting questions, scales and cut off points to measure fatigue must be
done with extreme care in order to successfully identify CFS cases.