Cited by 30Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Chronic Fatigue Self-Management in Primary Care: A Randomized Trial

Open access
Friedberg, Fred, Napoli, Anthony, Coronel, Janna, Adamowicz, Jenna, Seva, Viktoria, Caikauskaite, Indre, Ngan, Man Chi, Chang, Jeremy +1 more·2013·Psychosomatic Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of brief fatigue self-management (FSM) for medically unexplained chronic fatigue (UCF) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in primary care. METHODS: A randomized controlled design was used wherein 111 patients with UCF or CFS were randomly assigned to two sessions of FSM, two sessions of symptom monitoring support (attention control; AC), or a usual care control condition (UC). Participants were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 12 months after treatment. The primary outcome, the Fatigue Severity Scale, measured fatigue impact on functioning. Analysis was by intention to treat (multiple imputation) and also by per protocol. RESULTS: A group × time interaction across the 15-month trial showed significantly greater reductions in fatigue impact in the FSM group in comparison with the AC group (p < .023) and the UC group (p < .013). Medium effect sizes for reduced fatigue impact in the FSM group were found in comparison with the AC group (d = 0.46) and the UC group (d = 0.40). The per-protocol analysis revealed large effect sizes for the same comparisons. Clinically significant decreases in fatigue impact were found for 53% of participants in the FSM condition, 14% in the AC condition, and 17% in the UC condition. Dropout rates at the 12-month follow-up were high (42%-53%), perhaps attributable to the burden of monthly telephone calls to assess health care use. CONCLUSION: A brief self-management intervention for patients with UCF or CFS seemed to be clinically effective for reducing the impact of fatigue on functioning. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00997451.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/psy.0b013e31829dbed4

Cites

44 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Psychological functioning was measured using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) scale in eight studies.

    “Psychological functioning was measured using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) scale [124] in eight studies”

    From Helping patients help themselves: A systematic review of self-management support strategies in primary health care practice (2019) · cites this paper as [94]

    The Method (Assessments and Outcome Measures; page unavailable) says this trial measured depressive symptoms with the BDI-II. It does not establish that both the BDI and BDI-II were used across eight studies; its Results use “BDI” as shorthand for the depression measure. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Friedberg et al.'s chronic fatigue self-management intervention revealed no significant changes in SF-36PF scores by time, treatment group, or diagnostic group (p>0.05).

    “No significant changes in scores by time, treatment group, or diagnostic group were revealed (p>0.05)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Friedberg, F., Napoli, A., Coronel, J., Adamowicz, J., Seva, V., Caikauskaite, I., Ngan, M. C., Chang, J., & Meng, H.
Affiliations
  • Stony Brook University (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Friedberg, Fred
Venue
Psychosomatic Medicine
Published
2013-09
Volume
75
Issue
7
Pages
650-657
ISSN
0033-3174 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2318232454
Cited by
30
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4
FWCI
2.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychosomatic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (R01NR010229)
  • National Center for Research Resources (M01RR010710, MO1 RR10710)
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 › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
chronic fatigue syndrome, fatigue self-management, brief intervention, symptom monitoring, attentional control, Fatigue Severity Scale, primary care, telephone follow-up, dropout
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Attention, Counseling, Female, Humans, Male, Medical Records, Patient Dropouts, Primary Health Care, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Self Care, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Practice Patterns, Nurses', Intention to Treat Analysis

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