Further validation of the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory in a US adult population sample.
Further validation of the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory in a US adult population sample.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1478-7954-7-18
复制
发表时间：
2009-12-15
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Reeves, William C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lin, Jin-Mann S;Brimmer, Dana J;Reeves, William C
背景：多维疲劳量表（MFI-20）是1995年开发的。从那时起，它被广泛用于癌症研究和癌症相关疾病，但从未在疲劳性疾病或美国人口选择的大量样本中得到验证。在这项研究中，我们试图检验MFI-20在美国乔治亚州人口中的信度和效度。此外，我们评估了MFI-20是否可以作为慢性疲劳和身体不适人群的补充诊断工具。方法：数据来源于一项基于人群的横断面研究，该研究调查了格鲁吉亚慢性疲劳综合征（CFS）的患病率。研究样本由三个诊断组组成：cfs样（292），慢性不适（269）和健康（222）。参与者完成了MFI-20以及其他一些心理社会功能测量，包括医疗结果调查简表36 （SF-36）、Zung抑郁自评量表（SDS）和Spielberger状态-特质焦虑量表（STAI）。我们使用几个标准来评估五个MFI-20子量表：项目间相关性、校正项目-总相关性、内部一致性信度（Cronbach's alpha系数）、结构效度、判别（已知组）效度、下限/上限效应，以及通过与SF-36、SDS和STAI工具的相关性进行的收敛效度。结果：平均项目间相关性范围为0.38至0.61，表明没有项目冗余。所有MFI-20子量表校正后的项目总数相关性均大于0.30,Cronbach’s alpha系数达到可接受的0.70水平。没有观察到明显的下限/上限效应。因子分析显示了因子复杂性。MFI-20在三个诊断组的所有亚量表上也有明显的区别。此外，与抑郁（SDS）、焦虑（STAI）和功能障碍（SF-36）的相关性显示出很强的收敛效度。结论：本研究为MFI-20作为一种有价值的工具用于慢性疾病和健康人群提供了支持。它还表明，MFI-20可以作为疲劳性疾病（如慢性疲劳综合症）的补充诊断工具。
BACKGROUND: The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20) was developed in 1995. Since then, it has been widely used in cancer research and cancer-related illnesses but has never been validated in fatiguing illnesses or in a large US population-selected sample. In this study, we sought to examine the reliability and validity of the MFI-20 in the population of the state of Georgia, USA. Further, we assessed whether the MFI-20 could serve as a complementary diagnostic tool in chronically fatigued and unwell populations.METHODS: The data derive from a cross-sectional population-based study investigating the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in Georgia. The study sample was comprised of three diagnostic groups: CFS-like (292), chronically unwell (269), and well (222). Participants completed the MFI-20 along with several other measures of psychosocial functioning, including the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36), the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), and the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). We assessed the five MFI-20 subscales using several criteria: inter-item correlations, corrected item-total correlations, internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficients), construct validity, discriminant (known-group) validity, floor/ceiling effects, and convergent validity through correlations with the SF-36, SDS, and STAI instruments.RESULTS: Averaged inter-item correlations ranged from 0.38 to 0.61, indicating no item redundancy. Corrected item-total correlations for all MFI-20 subscales were greater than 0.30, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients achieved an acceptable level of 0.70. No significant floor/ceiling effect was observed. Factor analysis demonstrated factorial complexity. The MFI-20 also distinguished clearly between three diagnostic groups on all subscales. Furthermore, correlations with depression (SDS), anxiety (STAI), and functional impairment (SF-36) demonstrated strong convergent validity.CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the MFI-20 as a valuable tool when used in chronically unwell and well populations. It also suggests that the MFI-20 could serve as a complementary diagnostic tool in fatiguing illnesses, such as CFS.