Comparing and Contrasting Consensus versus Empirical Domains
- PMID: 26977374
- PMCID: PMC4788637
- DOI: 10.1080/21641846.2015.1017344
Comparing and Contrasting Consensus versus Empirical Domains
Abstract
Background: Since the publication of the CFS case definition [1], there have been a number of other criteria proposed including the Canadian Consensus Criteria [2] and the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: International Consensus Criteria. [3].
Purpose: The current study compared these domains that were developed through consensus methods to one obtained through more empirical approaches using factor analysis.
Methods: Using data mining, we compared and contrasted fundamental features of consensus-based criteria versus empirical latent factors. In general, these approaches found the domain of Fatigue/Post-exertional malaise as best differentiating patients from controls.
Results: Findings indicated that the Fukuda et al. criteria had the worst sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusions: These outcomes might help both theorists and researchers better determine which fundamental domains to be used for the case definition.
Keywords: Myalgic Encephalomyelitis; biomarkers; case definitions; chronic fatigue syndrome.
References
-
- Fukuda K, Straus SE, Hickie I, Sharpe MC, Dobbins JG, Komaroff A. The chronic fatigue syndrome: A comprehensive approach to its definition and study. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1994;121:953–959. - PubMed
-
- Carruthers BM, Jain AK, De Meirleir KL, Peterson DL, Klimas NG, Lerner AM, et al. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: Clinical working case definition, diagnostic and treatments protocols. Journal of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. 2003;11:7–115.
-
- Jason LA, Jessen T, Porter N, Boulton A, Njoku MG, Friedberg F. Examining types of fatigue among individuals with ME/CFS. Disability Studies Quarterly. 2009;29
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources