hkr.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Swedish version of the 16-item Parkinson Fatigue Scale (PFS-16)
Högskolan Kristianstad, Sektionen för hälsa och samhälle, Avdelningen för Hälsovetenskap. Högskolan Kristianstad, Forskningsmiljön PRO-CARE.ORCID-id: 0000-0003-2174-372X
Department of Neurology, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Neurology, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
2012 (engelsk)Inngår i: Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, ISSN 0001-6314, E-ISSN 1600-0404, Vol. 125, nr 4, s. 288-292Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Background –  The PFS-16 is a 16-item fatigue scale for Parkinson’s disease (PD) developed in the UK. However, documented translations and psychometric evaluations are sparse.

Aim –  To translate the PFS-16 into Swedish and conduct initial testing of its psychometric properties.

Methods –  Following translation, the PFS-16 was administered twice (2 weeks apart) to 30 people with PD (18 men; mean age/PD duration, 60/6.4 years). The PFS-16 uses five response categories (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree), and the total score is the mean over item scores (1–5; 5 = more fatigue). An alternative, dichotomised scoring method has also been suggested (total score, 0–16; 16 = more fatigue). Scaling assumptions, floor/ceiling effects, reliability, and correlations with other variables including the generic fatigue scale Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Fatigue scale (FACIT-F) were tested.

Results –  Scaling assumptions were generally supported for the original scoring [range of mean (SD) item scores, 2.1–3.3 (1–1.4); corrected item-total correlations, ≥0.40], but not for dichotomised scoring [range of mean (SD) item scores, 0.1–0.6 (0.3–0.5); corrected item-total correlations, ≥0.16]. Reliabilities were ≥0.88. Floor effects were absent (original scoring) and >23% (dichotomised scoring); there were no ceiling effects. Correlations with other variables followed expectations (e.g. −0.88 with FACIT-F scores).

Conclusions –  These observations support the psychometric properties of the Swedish PFS-16, but cautions against dichotomised scoring.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
2012. Vol. 125, nr 4, s. 288-292
Emneord [en]
fatigue, Parkinson’s disease, reliability, validity
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-8541DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0404.2011.01560.xISI: 000301223100014PubMedID: 21692754OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-8541DiVA, id: diva2:441403
Tilgjengelig fra: 2011-09-15 Laget: 2011-09-15 Sist oppdatert: 2017-12-08bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstPubMed

Personposter BETA

Hagell, Peter

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Hagell, Peter
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
Acta Neurologica Scandinavica

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 115 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf