|
Page 3 of 3 A multisite, prospective, repeated measures design was used to make comparisons within subjects over time to identify the MCID in cancer patients actively receiving treatment. Subjects (N=103) rated the degree of change in their fatigue over 2 days. MCID was determined following established procedures at two points in time 5,6. The MCID for increases in fatigue, reported as mean change, for the total scale was 5.7, for decreases in fatigue was -2.1 and for each item was 0.8 for increases in fatigue and -0.4 for decreases in fatigue. The effect size was 0.71. This information can be used to determine effect size and calculate sample size when planning studies7. The study that determined the MCID for the SCFS tested four other scales and observed the same pattern and proportion of fatigue change in the other instruments providing further validity of the SCFS. Administration and Scoring
The SCFS can be self-administered by computer or on paper, or read to the respondent. Respondents circle a number between 1 (not at all) and 5 (extremely). Total score is obtained by summing the items. Scores range from 6 to 30, with higher scores indicting greater levels of fatigue. The SCFS has been tested using the following time frames: in the past 2-3 days (original wording), in the past week, and in the past month. Completion time on the scale ranges from 1 to 2 minutes. The scale has been translated into several different languages (e.g. Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese) and continues to demonstrate reliability and validity. References | 1 | Lynn, M.R.. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 1986;35:382-5. | | 2 | Schwartz, A.L. Reliability and validity of the Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale. Oncology Nursing Forum 1998;25:711-8. | | 3 | Bentler, P.M. EQS Structural Equations Program Manual, Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc. 1995. | | 4 | Schwartz, A.L., & Meek, P.M. Additional construct validity of the Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale. J. Nursing Measurement 1999;7:35-45. | | 5 | Jaeschke, R. Singer, J. Guyatt, G.H. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimally clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials 1989;10:407-15 | | 6 | Jaeschke, R., Guyatt, G.H. Shannon, H., Walter, S., Cook, D., Heddle, N. Basic statistics for clinicians: Assessing the effects of treatment measures of association. CMAJ 1995;152:351-7. | | 7 | Schwartz , A.L., Meek, P.M., Nail, L.M., Fargo, J., Lundquist, M., Donofrio, M., Grainger, M., Throckmorton, T., Mateo, M. Measurement of fatigue determining minimally important clinical differences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2002;55:239-44. |
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>
|
Publications