↓ Skip to main content

Psychometric properties and measurement equivalence of the Multidimensional Fatigue Syndrome Inventory- Short Form (MFSI-SF) amongst breast cancer and lymphoma patients in Singapore

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychometric properties and measurement equivalence of the Multidimensional Fatigue Syndrome Inventory- Short Form (MFSI-SF) amongst breast cancer and lymphoma patients in Singapore
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12955-018-0846-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexandre Chan, Claire Lew, Xiao Jun Wang, Terence Ng, Jung-woo Chae, Hui Ling Yeo, Maung Shwe, Yan Xiang Gan

Abstract

Currently, several fatigue measurement instruments are available to evaluate and measure cancer-related fatigue. Amongst them, Multidimensional Fatigue Syndrome Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF) is a self-reported instrument and a multidimensional scale that aims to capture the global, somatic, affective, cognitive and behavioural symptoms of fatigue. This study examines the psychometric properties and measurement equivalence of the English and Chinese versions of MFSI-SF in breast cancer and lymphoma patients in Singapore. Patients were recruited from National Cancer Centre Singapore. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of MFSI-SF were evaluated in this study. Convergent validity was evaluated by correlating total and subscales of MFSI-SF to known related constructs in EORTC QLQ-C30. Known group validity was assessed based on patients' cancer stage, pain, insomnia and depression symptoms. Reliability was evaluated by Cronbach's α. Responsiveness analyses were performed with patients who have undergone at least one cycle of chemotherapy. Multiple regression was used to compare the total and subscale scores of MSFI-SF between the two language versions. Data from 246 (160 English and 86 Chinese version) breast cancer and lymphoma patients were included in the study. Moderate to high correlations were observed between correlated MFSI-SF subscales and EORTC QLQ-C30 domains (|r| = 0.524 to 0.774) except for a poor correlation (r = 0.394) observed between MFSI-SF vigour subscale and EORTC QLQ-C30 role functioning subscale. Total MFSI-SF scores could differentiate between patients with higher depression, pain and insomnia status. Internal consistency of MFSI-SF was also high (α = 0.749 to 0.944). Moderate correlation was observed between change in total MFSI-SF score and change in fatigue symptom scale score and global QoL score on EORTC QLQ-C30 (|r| = 0.478 and 0.404 respectively). Poor correlations were observed between change in scores of hypothesised subscales (|r| = 0.202 to 0.361) except for a moderate correlation between change in MFSI-SF emotional fatigue score and change in EORTC QLQ-C30 emotional functioning domain score. Measurement equivalence was established for all subscales and total MFSI-SF score except for the emotional and vigour subscales. This study supports the use of MFSI-SF as a reasonably valid scale with good internal consistency for measuring fatigue levels in the Singapore cancer population.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Unspecified 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 24 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 14%
Unspecified 6 8%
Psychology 6 8%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 27 37%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 January 2018.
All research outputs
#2,490,438
of 15,442,255 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#235
of 1,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,366
of 365,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,442,255 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 365,930 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them