Psychometric properties of the Fatigue Severity Scale and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
Abstract
Objective Fatigue is one of the most common, debilitating and life altering symptoms experienced by those with multiple sclerosis (MS) and has become the focus of therapeutic interventions and clinical rehabilitation. There is limited evidence regarding the psychometric properties and clinical relevance of fatigue outcomes for interpreting the effectiveness of intervention and rehabilitation strategies. This study determined the reliability, precision and clinically important change of the uni-dimensional Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) and the multi-dimensional Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS). Methods The FSS and MFIS along with physical, psychological and cognitive clinical outcomes were administered to a sample of 82 persons with MS in a clinical research setting on two time points, separated by six months. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analyses established reliability; standard error of measurement (SEM) and coefficient of variation (CV) determined precision; minimal detectable change (MDC) defined clinically important change. Results Participants varied in type of MS and disability status, with 77% of participants classified as having substantial fatigue, based on the criteria of a mean FSS score ≥4. The MFIS (ICC=0.863) and the FSS (ICC=0.751) had acceptable reliability over six months. Precision was reasonable for both scales (based on SEM and CV estimates) but better for the FSS. MDC estimates were established and were lower for the FSS. Conclusion Reliab…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The FSS is a validated 9-item measure; average scores of ≥4 are suggestive of fatigue.
“Fatigue severity was assessed with the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)40, a validated 9-item measure; average scores of ≥4 are suggestive of fatigue40–44.”
From Ecological momentary assessment of pain, fatigue, depressive, and cognitive symptoms reveals significant daily variability in multiple sclerosis (2017) · cites this paper as [41]
Cites
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x · Cited by 47,139 · see citing works
The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research
Buysse, D. J., Reynolds, C. F., Monk, T. H., Berman, S. R., & Kupfer, D. J. (1989) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/0165-1781(89)90047-4 · Cited by 35,234 · see citing works
Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245 · Cited by 4,621 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Correlations were compared between FSS and MFIS scores with other outcomes based on the approach provided by Dunn and Clark as referred to by Steiger [50] using the Z1* values; values greater than 1.”
BackgroundMethodEvaluation of the modified fatigue impact scale in four different European countries
Kos, D., Kerckhofs, E., Carrea, I., Verza, R., Ramos, M., & Jansa, J. (2005) · Multiple Sclerosis Journal · doi:10.1191/1352458505ms1117oa · Cited by 381 · see citing works
Hadjimichael, O., Vollmer, T., & Oleen-Burkey, M. (2008) · Health and Quality of Life Outcomes · doi:10.1186/1477-7525-6-100 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
Longitudinal correlates of fatigue in multiple sclerosis.
Patrick, E., Christodoulou, C., Krupp, L., & on behalf of the New York State MS Consortium (2009) · Multiple Sclerosis Journal · doi:10.1177/1352458508097466 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Translating Fatigue to Human Performance
ENOKA, R. M., & DUCHATEAU, J. (2016) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000000929 · Cited by 948 · see citing works
Kratz, A. L., Murphy, S. L., & Braley, T. J. (2017) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2017.07.002 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Yoo, F., Schlosser, R. J., Storck, K. A., Ganjaei, K. G., Rowan, N. R., & Soler, Z. M. (2019) · International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · doi:10.1002/alr.22406 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Learmonth, Y. C., Dlugonski, D., Pilutti, L. A., Sandroff, B. M., Klaren, R., & Motl, R. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Corresponding author
- Motl, R.W.
- Venue
- Journal of the Neurological Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-08
- Volume
- 331
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 102-107
- ISSN
- 0022-510X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2122345110
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 29 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 6.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the Neurological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Multiple Sclerosis Society (PP1695)
- Multiple Sclerosis International Federation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Keywords
- fatigue, multiple sclerosis, Fatigue Severity Scale, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, psychometric properties, reliability statistics, measurement precision, minimal detectable change, clinically important change, rehabilitation outcomes, fatigue analysis
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cognition Disorders, Disability Evaluation, Fatigue, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Sleep Wake Disorders, Reproducibility of Results
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
