Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Scala oboselii în cancer (CFS)× | Scala de Oboseală Chalder (CF Scale)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Asistență medicală oncologică | Asistență medicală oncologică |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 2000 | 1993 |
| Autorul original≠ | Takuo Okuyama | Trudie Chalder |
| Tip≠ | Patient self-report three-dimensional fatigue scale | Patient self-report fatigue scale with physical and mental subscales |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Okuyama, T., Akechi, T., Kugaya, A., et al. (2000). Development and validation of a cancer fatigue scale: a brief, three-dimensional, disease-specific instrument. J Pain Symptom Manage, 19(1), 5–14. DOI ↗ | Chalder, T., Berelowitz, G., Pawlikowska, T., et al. (1993). Development of a fatigue scale. J Psychosom Res, 37(2), 147–153. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative≠ | CFS, Okuyama Fatigue Scale | CFS, Chalder Fatigue Scale, Fatigue Scale |
| Înrudite | 5 | 5 |
| Rezumat≠ | The Cancer Fatigue Scale is a 15-item disease-specific self-report instrument that comprehensively assesses three dimensions of cancer-related fatigue: physical, cognitive, and emotional. Developed by Takuo Okuyama and colleagues at the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research and published in 2000, the CFS provides a brief yet multidimensional fatigue profile suitable for both clinical practice and research, with particular strength in non-English-speaking populations where it has been extensively validated. | The Chalder Fatigue Scale is an 11-item brief self-report instrument measuring physical and mental fatigue, developed by Trudie Chalder and colleagues at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, in 1993. Originally designed for chronic fatigue syndrome (myalgic encephalomyelitis/ME) research, the CFS has been extensively validated across cancer populations, chronic illness, and general populations. The scale offers two scoring options: continuous 0–33 scale for severity measurement or bimodal 0–11 scoring for caseness determination, making it versatile for both research and clinical screening. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|