Blog
About

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: not found

Self-report fatigue questionnaires in multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and stroke: a systematic review of measurement properties

Read this article at

ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
Bookmark
      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

      Abstract

      PurposeTo critically appraise, compare and summarize the measurement properties of self-report fatigue questionnaires validated in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson’s disease (PD) or stroke.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and SPORTdiscus were searched. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of studies. A qualitative data synthesis was performed to rate the measurement properties for each questionnaire.ResultsThirty-eight studies out of 5,336 records met the inclusion criteria, evaluating 31 questionnaires. Moderate evidence was found for adequate internal consistency and structural validity of the Fatigue Scale for Motor and Cognitive functions (FSMC) and for adequate reliability and structural validity of the Unidimensional Fatigue Impact Scale (U-FIS) in MS.ConclusionsWe recommend the FSMC and U-FIS in MS. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue subscale (FACIT-F) and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) show promise in PD, and the Profile of Mood States Fatigue subscale (POMS-F) for stroke. Future studies should focus on measurement error, responsiveness and interpretability. Studies should also put emphasis on providing input for the theoretical construct of fatigue, allowing the development of questionnaires that reflect generic and disease-specific symptoms of fatigue.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0009-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

      Related collections

      Most cited references 79

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.

      Recently, an increasing number of systematic reviews have been published in which the measurement properties of health status questionnaires are compared. For a meaningful comparison, quality criteria for measurement properties are needed. Our aim was to develop quality criteria for design, methods, and outcomes of studies on the development and evaluation of health status questionnaires. Quality criteria for content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, construct validity, reproducibility, longitudinal validity, responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects, and interpretability were derived from existing guidelines and consensus within our research group. For each measurement property a criterion was defined for a positive, negative, or indeterminate rating, depending on the design, methods, and outcomes of the validation study. Our criteria make a substantial contribution toward defining explicit quality criteria for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Our criteria can be used in systematic reviews of health status questionnaires, to detect shortcomings and gaps in knowledge of measurement properties, and to design validation studies. The future challenge will be to refine and complete the criteria and to reach broad consensus, especially on quality criteria for good measurement properties.
        Bookmark
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: found
        • Article: not found

        The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus.

        Fatigue is a prominent disabling symptom in a variety of medical and neurologic disorders. To facilitate research in this area, we developed a fatigue severity scale, subjected it to tests of internal consistency and validity, and used it to compare fatigue in two chronic conditions: systemic lupus erythematosus and multiple sclerosis. Administration of the fatigue severity scale to 25 patients with multiple sclerosis, 29 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, and 20 healthy adults revealed that the fatigue severity scale was internally consistent, correlated well with visual analogue measures, clearly differentiated controls from patients, and could detect clinically predicted changes in fatigue over time. Fatigue had a greater deleterious impact on daily living in patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus compared with controls. The results further showed that fatigue was largely independent of self-reported depressive symptoms and that several characteristics could differentiate fatigue that accompanies multiple sclerosis from fatigue that accompanies systemic lupus erythematosus. This study demonstrates (1) the clinical and research applications of a scale that measures fatigue severity and (2) helps to identify features that distinguish fatigue between two chronic medical disorders.
          Bookmark
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study

          Background Aim of the COSMIN study (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) was to develop a consensus-based checklist to evaluate the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties. We present the COSMIN checklist and the agreement of the panel on the items of the checklist. Methods A four-round Delphi study was performed with international experts (psychologists, epidemiologists, statisticians and clinicians). Of the 91 invited experts, 57 agreed to participate (63%). Panel members were asked to rate their (dis)agreement with each proposal on a five-point scale. Consensus was considered to be reached when at least 67% of the panel members indicated ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’. Results Consensus was reached on the inclusion of the following measurement properties: internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, content validity (including face validity), construct validity (including structural validity, hypotheses testing and cross-cultural validity), criterion validity, responsiveness, and interpretability. The latter was not considered a measurement property. The panel also reached consensus on how these properties should be assessed. Conclusions The resulting COSMIN checklist could be useful when selecting a measurement instrument, peer-reviewing a manuscript, designing or reporting a study on measurement properties, or for educational purposes.
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Affiliations
            [1 ]Department of Physiotherapy, University of Applied Sciences Leiden, Zernikedreef 11, PO Box 382, 2300 AJ Leiden, The Netherlands
            [2 ]Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research Institute MOVE, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
            [3 ]Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
            [4 ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
            Contributors
            +31-715188299 , +31-71-5188801 , elbers.r@hsleiden.nl
            Journal
            Qual Life Res
            Qual Life Res
            Quality of Life Research
            Springer Netherlands (Dordrecht )
            0962-9343
            1573-2649
            20 October 2011
            20 October 2011
            August 2012
            : 21
            : 6
            : 925-944
            3389599
            22012025
            9
            10.1007/s11136-011-0009-2
            © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
            Categories
            Review
            Custom metadata
            © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

            Comments

            Comment on this article