Cited by 395Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchLong-Term Effects of COVID-19Traumatic Brain Injury Research

A systematic review describing the prognosis of chronic fatigue syndrome.

Cairns, R., Hotopf, M.·2005·Occupational Medicine

Abstract

Aim To perform a systematic review of studies describing the prognosis of chronic fatigue (CF) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and to identify occupational outcomes from such studies. Method A literature search was used to identify all studies describing the clinical follow-up of patients following a diagnosis of CF or CFS. The prognosis is described in terms of the proportion of individuals improved during the period of follow-up. Return to work, other medical illnesses and death as outcomes are also considered, as are variables which may influence prognosis. Results Twenty-eight articles met the inclusion criteria and, for the 14 studies of subjects meeting operational criteria for CFS, the median full recovery rate was 5% (range 0-31%) and the median proportion of patients who improved during follow-up was 39.5% (range 8-63%). Less fatigue severity at baseline, a sense of control over symptoms and not attributing illness to a physical cause were all associated with a good outcome. Return to work at follow-up ranged from 8 to 30% in the three studies that considered this outcome. Conclusions Full recovery from untreated CFS is rare. The prognosis for an improvement in symptoms is less gloomy. This review looks at the course of CF/CFS without systematic intervention. However, there is increasing evidence for the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural and graded exercise therapies. Medical retirement should be postponed until a trial of such treatment has been given.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/occmed/kqi013

Cites

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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 34 · Cited by 395

Authors
Cairns, R., & Hotopf, M.
Corresponding author
Cairns, R.
Venue
Occupational Medicine
Published
2005-01-01
Volume
55
Issue
1
Pages
20-31
ISSN
  • 0962-7480 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-8405
OpenAlex
W2122793115
Cited by
395
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 17
FWCI
2.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Occupational Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic fatigue, prognosis, recovery rate, return to work, occupational outcomes, illness perception, perceived control, illness attribution, cognitive behavioral therapy, graded exercise therapy, medical retirement
MeSH terms
Fatigue, Humans, Prognosis, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Occupational Health

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