| Title |
Validation of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale relative to other instrumentation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Rheumatology, May 2005
|
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Cella, Susan Yount, Mark Sorensen, Elliot Chartash, Nishan Sengupta, James Grober |
| Abstract |
This study validated a brief measure of fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Scale. The FACIT Fatigue was tested along with measures previously validated in RA: the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) and Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Vitality. The sample included 636 patients with RA enrolled in a 24 week double blind, randomized clinical trial (RCT) of adalimumab versus placebo. The FACIT Fatigue showed good internal consistency (alpha = 0.86 to 0.87), strong association with SF-36 Vitality (r = 0.73 to 0.84) and MAF (r = -0.84 to -0.88), and the ability to differentiate patients according to clinical change using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria (ACR 20/50/70). Psychometric performance of the FACIT Fatigue scale was comparable to that of the other 2 fatigue measures. A minimally important difference in FACIT Fatigue change score of 3-4 points was confirmed in a separate sample of 271 patients with RA enrolled in a second double blind RCT of adalimumab versus placebo. The FACIT Fatigue is a brief, valid measure for monitoring this important symptom and its effects on patients with RA. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 168 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 16% |
| Researcher | 24 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 18% |
| Unknown | 39 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 61 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 9% |
| Psychology | 15 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 12% |
| Unknown | 43 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2023.
All research outputs
#7,357,897
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rheumatology
#1,477
of 3,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,024
of 70,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rheumatology
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 70,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.