Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Inventarul Multidimensional de Oboseală (MFI-20)× | Scala de Oboseală Chalder (CF Scale)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Asistență medicală oncologică | Asistență medicală oncologică |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1995 | 1993 |
| Autorul original≠ | Eva Smets | Trudie Chalder |
| Tip≠ | Patient self-report five-dimensional fatigue inventory | Patient self-report fatigue scale with physical and mental subscales |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Smets, E. M., Garssen, B., Bonke, B., & De Haes, J. C. (1995). The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20): a short questionnaire for measuring fatigue. J Psychosom Res, 39(3), 315–325. 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≠ | MFI, MFI-20 | CFS, Chalder Fatigue Scale, Fatigue Scale |
| Înrudite | 5 | 5 |
| Rezumat≠ | The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory is a 20-item self-report instrument that comprehensively measures five distinct dimensions of fatigue: general fatigue, physical fatigue, reduced activity, reduced motivation, and mental fatigue. Developed by Smets and colleagues in 1995, the MFI-20 is grounded in a theoretical model distinguishing fatigue phenomenology from behavioral and cognitive consequences, making it particularly valuable for research examining fatigue mechanisms and interventions targeting specific fatigue dimensions. | 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 ↗ |
|
|