Original ArticleClassical test theory and item response theory/Rasch model to assess differences between patient-reported fatigue using 7-day and 4-week recall periods
Introduction
Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) has been defined as overwhelming and sustained exhaustion that decreases capacity for physical and mental work [1], and it is the most common unrelieved symptom experienced by cancer patients and survivors [2], [3], [4], [5]. Numerous measurement tools have been developed to measure patient-reported fatigue: from a 0–10 screening item to a multidimensional fatigue inventory, and from traditional fixed length scales to full-item banks that serve as the foundation for computerized adaptive testing [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. However, there is still no consensus on which time frame better captures fatigue experienced by patients. For example, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F [10]) taps fatigue experienced during the past 7 days; the Brief Fatigue Inventory [7] captures it within 24 hours; the Fatigue Symptom Inventory [6] measures fatigue severity in the past 7 days as well as “current” fatigue; and the SF-36 Health Survey [12] and the PedsQL Multidimensional Fatigue Scale [13] have both 7-day and 4-week versions available.
Various factors (e.g., gender, memory, and personality) may have an effect on how patients report their symptom severity [14], [15]. For example, when persons are asked to report their fatigue based on longer periods of time, memory processes and personality disposition are likely to influence their responses. Although little is actually known about the “extraneous” factors that influence CRF, we may extrapolate or infer based on what is known about other symptoms, such as pain or mood. Patient evaluations of pain and mood are known to vary systematically with the length of the recall period [15]. Robinson and Clore [16] argue that different types of memory are accessed when people are recalling relatively recent affect (the last few days) vs. longer-term recall (the last week or month). Episodic memory is operative for short-term recall, whereas semantic memory comes into play with longer-term recall. Because semantic memory is closely aligned with one's beliefs as opposed to actual experience, longer-term recall may be biased. Other factors, such as gender, also influence the accuracy of recall. Additionally, investigators noted that patients tend to endorse fatigue ratings based on selective memory of the worst fatigue experienced during a period and to downplay less severe or fatigue-absent periods (peak-end effect and duration neglect, respectively) [17].
This study aimed to compare fatigue reported based on 7-day and 4-week time frames and explore factors that might affect patients' responses. We compared the impact of a 7-day vs. a 4-week time frame because both are commonly used in fatigue assessments. Results of this study therefore offer insight into the practical importance of differences in ratings by time frame.
Section snippets
Procedures
Two touch-screen computers were dedicated to this study. One was loaded with the FACIT-F [10], using a 7-day time frame. The other was loaded with exactly the same questions, but with a 4-week time frame. These two computers were assigned to two research assistants (RAs) to recruit patients from five Chicago metropolitan clinics. Because both RAs recruited patients from all five clinics, it was expected that each clinic had similar percentage of patients completing 7-day and 4-week versions of
Sample
Two hundred and sixteen patients were recruited, 116 completed the 4-week version and 100 completed the 7-day version of the questionnaires. The Institutional Review Board of each study site approved the study before patients were approached, and all participants provided written informed consent. Sample demographic and clinical information, grouped by the time frame they were assigned, is shown in Table 1. In brief, most of the patients in both groups (4 weeks; 7 days) were female (64%; 63%),
Discussion
At the item and scale levels, self-reported fatigue was not significantly different between 7-day and 4-week time frames. Neither patient gender nor severity of fatigue had an impact on this result. When we examined the amount of information each item provided across the fatigue continuum, inconsistent results for some items were identified. Although some items were equally precise across the fatigue continuum, others (2 of 13) showed considerable differences in precision. The 7-day time frame
Acknowledgments
Funding source: This study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute (#CA60068, PI: David Cella) and National Institutes of Health (U01 AR 052177-01; PI: David Cella).
References (30)
- et al.
The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) psychometric qualities of an instrument to assess fatigue
J Psychosom Res
(1995) - et al.
Measuring fatigue and other anemia-related symptoms with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) measurement system
J Pain Symptom Manage
(1997) - et al.
An item bank was created to improve the measurement of cancer-related fatigue
J Clin Epidemiol
(2005) - et al.
Intensive momentary reporting of pain with an electronic diary: reactivity, compliance, and patient satisfaction
Pain
(2003) - et al.
Patients' memories of painful medical treatments: real-time and retrospective evaluations of two minimally invasive procedures
Pain
(1996) - et al.
An item response theory based pain item bank can enhance measurement precision
J Pain Symptom Manage
(2005) - et al.
Memory for acute pain experience is specifically inaccurate but generally reliable
Pain
(1993) Memory for pain and affect in chronic pain patients
Pain
(1993)- et al.
Memory and pain: tests of mood congruity and state dependent learning in experimentally induced and clinical pain
Pain
(1990) - et al.
Effects of present pain level on recall of chronic pain and medication use
Pain
(1993)
Nursing diagnoses: definition and classification, 1997–1998
Factors influencing quality of life in cancer patients: anemia and fatigue
Semin Oncol
Cancer-related fatigue: prevalence of proposed diagnostic criteria in a United States sample of cancer survivors
J Clin Oncol
Oncology Nursing Society research priorities survey
Oncol Nurs Forum
Cancer-related fatigue: inevitable, unimportant and untreatable? Results of a multi-centre patient survey. Cancer Fatigue Forum
Ann Oncol
Cited by (31)
CA-PROM: Validation of a general patient-reported outcomes measure for Chinese patients with cancer
2020, Cancer EpidemiologyUsing item response theory to optimize measurement of chronic stress in pregnancy
2017, Social Science ResearchPilot study of the effects of mixed light touch manual therapies on active duty soldiers with chronic post-traumatic stress disorder and injury to the head
2016, Journal of Bodywork and Movement TherapiesCitation Excerpt :All available validated instruments measuring headache, such as the Migraine Disability Assessment Test (Stewart et al., 2001) and the Headache Impact Test - 6 (Kosinski et al., 2003) ask the participant to reflect on their symptoms over the preceding seven or more days. For example, in a study using classical testing theory versus Item Response Theory to assess fatigue in seven-day or four-week recall periods, Lai et al. (2009) suggests that participants use a much shorter time frame of recall, ‘today’, to answer questions requesting a recall of seven days or more. Similarly, Bennett et al. (2012) reported that recall of symptoms and impacts over seven day and daily diary scores were equivalent in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Linking fatigue measures on a common reporting metric
2014, Journal of Pain and Symptom Management