Open AccessFatigue Scales and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Issues of Sensitivity and Specificity
Author(s) -
Leonard A. Jason,
Meredyth Evans,
Molly Brown,
Nicole Porter,
Abigail Brown,
Jessica Hunnell,
Valerie R. Anderson,
Athena Lerch
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
disability studies quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2159-8371
pISSN - 1041-5718
DOI - 10.18061/dsq.v31i1.1375
Subject(s) - chronic fatigue syndrome , receiver operating characteristic , chronic fatigue , medicine , physical therapy , sensitivity (control systems) , scale (ratio) , physical medicine and rehabilitation , physics , quantum mechanics , electronic engineering , engineering
Few studies have explored issues of sensitivity and specificity for using the fatigue construct to identify patients meeting chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) criteria. 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 problems. 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.