ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2015
Development of a clinician-administered National Institutes of Health-Brief Fatigue Inventory: A measure of fatigue in the context of depressive disorders.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the association between fatigue and cognition in chronic noncommunicable diseases.Chronic illness · 2021Pooled it
- Disentangling the association of depression on the anti-fatigue effects of ketamine.Journal of affective disorders · 2019Trial
- An assessment of the anti-fatigue effects of ketamine from a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study in bipolar disorder.Journal of affective disorders · 2016Trial
- Article
- Fatigue in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: Prevalence, Burden and Pharmacological Approaches to Management.CNS drugs · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFatigue is a complex, multidimensional condition. Although it is often associated with depression, it is not known whether it has a distinct network from depression or whether it can be clinically evaluated, separately. This study describes preliminary findings in the development of a brief, clinician-administered instrument to measure fatigue in the context of depressive disorders using items from existing clinician-administered depression and mania scales.
methodsBased on items from prior fatigue measurements, items were selected from the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Young Mania Rating Scale, and Structured Interview Guide for HDRS with Atypical Depression. The final items composed the NIH-Brief Fatigue Inventory (NIH-BFI). Responses from 89 depressed adults collected pre- and post-antidepressant therapy (ADT) determined the reliability and consistency of the NIH-BFI using Cronbach's alpha and principal components analysis (PCA). Correlations of the NIH-BFI and fatigue items from other scales before and after ADT explored validity.
resultsThe 7-item NIH-BFI had Cronbach alphas ranging from 0.81 to 0.88 and PCA indicating a single dimension. The NIH-BFI score was strongly correlated (r = 0.73, p < 0.001) with fatigue items from Beck Depression Index, with MADRS without fatigue items (r = 0.77, p < 0.001), and HDRS without fatigue items (pre: r = 0.69, p < 0.001).
conclusionsPreliminary findings show support for internal consistency reliability and validity of the NIH-BFI, a clinician-administered measure of fatigue. Further testing in other clinical populations is recommended to obtain additional information on reliability and validity. The NIH-BFI provides a method for clinician-rated fatigue that may be a separate from depression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.