Cited by 56Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsLong-Term Effects of COVID-19

Metacognitions and negative emotions as predictors of symptom severity in chronic fatigue syndrome

Maher-Edwards, Lorraine, Fernie, Bruce A., Murphy, Gabrielle, Wells, Adrian, Spada, Marcantonio M.·2011·Journal of Psychosomatic Research

Abstract

Objective Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) describes a condition that is primarily characterized by fatigue and flu-like symptoms that are not alleviated by rest. This study investigated the relationship among metacognitions, negative emotions, and symptom severity in CFS.Methods A total of 96 patients who had received a diagnosis of CFS according to the Oxford Criteria completed a battery of self-report measures that consisted of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales, the 30-Item Metacognitions Questionnaire, the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (CFQ), and the RAND 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey-Physical Functioning.Results Correlation analyses showed that negative emotions and metacognitions were positively correlated with measures of symptom severity and that metacognitions were a better predictor of symptom severity than anxiety and depression. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that (1) lack of cognitive confidence predicted both mental and physical factors of the CFQ and physical functioning independently of negative emotions and (2) beliefs about the need to control thoughts predicted the mental factor of the CFQ independently of negative emotions and lack of cognitive confidence.Conclusion The data support the potential application of the metacognitive model of psychological disorder to understanding CFS.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.09.016

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Maher-Edwards, L., Fernie, B. A., Murphy, G., Wells, A., & Spada, M. M.
Affiliations
  • The Royal Free Hospital (GB)
  • North East London NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Spada, Marcantonio M.
Venue
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-04
Volume
70
Issue
4
Pages
311-317
ISSN
0022-3999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094312695
Cited by
56
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosomatic Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
Keywords
chronic fatigue syndrome, metacognition, negative emotions, symptom severity, cognitive confidence, metacognitive beliefs, anxiety, depression, physical function, fatigue
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Cognition, Depression, Emotions, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Severity of Illness Index, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Self Report

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