Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Disability Policy Studies
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1044207308325995v1
20/2/93    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jason, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Reh, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evaluating the Centers for Disease Control’s Empirical Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Case Definition

Leonard A. Jason

DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois, Ljason{at}depaul.edu

Natasha Najar

DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois

Nicole Porter

DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois

Christy Reh

DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently developed an empirical case definition that specifies criteria and instruments to diagnose chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in order to bring more methodological rigor to the current CFS case definition. The present study investigated this new definition with 27 participants with a diagnosis of CFS and 37 participants with a diagnosis of a Major Depressive Disorder. Participants completed questionnaires measuring disability, fatigue, and symptoms. Findings indicated that 38% of those with a diagnosis of a Major Depressive Disorder were misclassified as having CFS using the new CDC definition. Given the CDC’s stature and respect in the scientific world, this new definition might be widely used by investigators and clinicians. This might result in the erroneous inclusion of people with primary psychiatric conditions in CFS samples, with detrimental consequences for the interpretation of epidemiologic, etiologic, and treatment efficacy findings for people with CFS.

Key Words: chronic fatigue syndrome • empirical case definition • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • Fukuda criteria • Major Depressive Disorders

This version was published on September 1, 2009

Journal of Disability Policy Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2, 93-100 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1044207308325995
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Disability Policy StudiesHome page
W. C. Reeves, B. M. Gurbaxani, J.-M. S. Lin, and E. R. Unger
A Response to Jason et al. (2009), "Evaluating the Centers for Disease Control's Empirical Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Case Definition"
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, March 1, 2010; 20(4): 229 - 232.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Disability Policy StudiesHome page
L. A. Jason, N. Porter, M. Brown, A. Brown, and M. Evans
A Constructive Debate With the CDC on the Empirical Case Definition of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, March 1, 2010; 20(4): 251 - 256.
[Abstract] [PDF]