Cited by 18Cancer survivorship and careCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life

Screening Properties of the Diagnostic Criteria for Cancer-Related Fatigue

Open access
Kuhnt, Susanne, Friedrich, Michael, Schulte, Thomas, Cella, David, Hinz, Andreas·2019·Oncology Research and Treatment

Abstract

Background: Within the theoretical framework of the ICD diagnostic criteria of cancer-related fatigue, we aim to investigate how those criteria can be used for screening purposes. Methods: Fatigue was assessed in a mixed sample of 1,225 cancer patients during their stay in a rehabilitation clinic using four different fatigue measures and the diagnostic criteria (Criterion A; DC-A). Psychometric evaluations (e.g., acceptance, reliability, validity, item analyses) were conducted for the sum score and for all items of the diagnostic criteria. Results: A total of 678 (57.1%) patients tested positive according to the DC-A. The sum score of the DC-A had good reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87) and validity, corresponded closely with other fatigue scales, and, with less than 1% missing values, showed a high degree of patients’ acceptance. The highest accuracy (approx. 0.80) and Youden indices (>0.55) were found for the items “Difficulties completing daily tasks” (A9), “Struggle to overcome inactivity” (A7), “Decreased motivation or interests” (A4), and “Unrefreshing sleep” (A6). Conclusion: The DC-A proved to be a well-accepted, easy to use, and reliable tool for measuring the severity of fatigue. In this paper, we make suggestions for the use of single items of the DC-A as a short and economical screening tool.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000501128

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Kuhnt, S., Friedrich, M., Schulte, T., Cella, D., & Hinz, A.
Affiliations
  • Leipzig University (DE)
  • Klinik Bad Oexen (DE)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Oncology Research and Treatment
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2019
Volume
42
Issue
9
Pages
440-447
ISSN
  • 2296-5262 (ISSN-L)
  • 2296-5270
OpenAlex
W2963783460
Cited by
18
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Oncology Research and Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Qucosa (Saxon State and University Library Dresden) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Deutsche Krebshilfe
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Keywords
cancer-related fatigue, diagnostic criteria, screening tool, psychometric properties, cancer rehabilitation, unrefreshing sleep
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Fatigue, Female, Germany, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rehabilitation Centers, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult

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