ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2018
Turkish version of Parkinson Fatigue Scale: Validity and reliability study of binary scoring method.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mental Fatigue in Parkinson's Disease: Systematic Review and Evaluation of Self-Reported Fatigue Scales.Parkinson's disease · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of the present study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Parkinson Fatigue Scale (PFS) into Turkish and to evaluate its reliability and validity. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween September 2015 and May 2016, a total of 138 patients (84 males, 54 females; mean age 62.8±9.3 years; range, 42 to 83 years) with Parkinson's disease (PD) were included in this study. The Turkish version of the PFS was analyzed for data quality, scaling assumptions, acceptability, reliability, and validity. We used the binary scoring method of the Parkinson Fatigue Scale.
resultsThe data quality for the Turkish version of the PFS was excellent. The scaling assumption was acceptable. The scale provided an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha was 0.955 for a test and 0.941 for a retest, and corrected item-to-total correlations were ranged from 0.478 to 0.849. The test-retest reliability (correlation coefficients were ranged from 0.650 to 0.875) was adequate. Although the total binary score of the PFS was not associated with demographic and clinical data, it was significantly correlated with some of the clinical rating scale scores, including the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, Schwab & England Activities of Daily Living Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index, 36-item Short Form Health Survey, 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, and Fatigue Severity Scale.
conclusionThe Turkish version of the PFS is an acceptable, valid, and reliable tool for the assessment of fatigue in PD patients.
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.