Skip header and navigation

1 records – page 1 of 1.

Data mining: comparing the empiric CFS to the Canadian ME/CFS case definition.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature132382
Source
J Clin Psychol. 2012 Jan;68(1):41-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2012
Author
Leonard A Jason
Beth Skendrovic
Jacob Furst
Abigail Brown
Angela Weng
Christine Bronikowski
Author Affiliation
DePaul University, USA. Ljason@depaul.edu
Source
J Clin Psychol. 2012 Jan;68(1):41-9
Date
Jan-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Canada
Chicago
Chronic Disease
Data Mining - methods
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Fatigue - diagnosis
Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic - diagnosis
Follow-Up Studies
Health Surveys
Humans
Interview, Psychological
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychometrics - instrumentation
Reproducibility of Results
Risk
Sensitivity and specificity
Severity of Illness Index
Abstract
This article contrasts two case definitions for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). We compared the empiric CFS case definition (Reeves et al., 2005) and the Canadian ME/CFS clinical case definition (Carruthers et al., 2003) with a sample of individuals with CFS versus those without. Data mining with decision trees was used to identify the best items to identify patients with CFS. Data mining is a statistical technique that was used to help determine which of the survey questions were most effective for accurately classifying cases. The empiric criteria identified about 79% of patients with CFS and the Canadian criteria identified 87% of patients. Items identified by the Canadian criteria had more construct validity. The implications of these findings are discussed.
Notes
Cites: Arch Intern Med. 2003 Jul 14;163(13):1530-612860574
Cites: BMC Health Serv Res. 2003 Dec 31;3(1):2514702202
Cites: Rev Infect Dis. 1991 Jan-Feb;13 Suppl 1:S8-112020806
Cites: Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-831593914
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 1994 Dec 15;121(12):953-97978722
Cites: J Psychosom Res. 1995 Apr;39(3):315-257636775
Cites: Am J Med. 1996 Jan;100(1):56-648579088
Cites: Arch Intern Med. 1999 Oct 11;159(18):2129-3710527290
Cites: BMC Med. 2005;3:1916356178
Cites: Int J Behav Med. 2006;13(3):244-5117078775
Cites: Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(7):589-9820617920
Cites: J Health Psychol. 2011 Apr;16(3):445-5621224330
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2001 Mar;66(1):51-711368410
PubMed ID
21823124 View in PubMed
Less detail