Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

A Comparison of Case Definitions of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

David W. Bates, Dedra Buchwald, Joshua Lee, Phalla Kith, Teresa H. Doolittle, Phoebe Umali and Anthony L. Komaroff
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Vol. 18, Supplement 1. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Current Concepts (Jan., 1994), pp. S11-S15
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4457587
Page Count: 5
  • Download ($42.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
A Comparison of Case Definitions of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Preview not available

Abstract

We compared three case definitions of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) applied to patients followed in CFS clinics at two institutions. All patients had debilitating fatigue without apparent etiology; patients with medical conditions associated with chronic fatigue and with major psychiatric disorders were stratified and presented separately. Patients were classified according to whether they met case definitions developed by a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Working Group, a British group, or an Australian group. When findings for 805 patients followed at the two clinics were combined, 61% met the CDC criteria, 55% met the British criteria, and 56% met the Australian criteria; these proportions were relatively similar at both sites. In addition, similar laboratory abnormalities were found for all case groups and for fatigued patients who met none of the three case definitions. These data suggest that more inclusive case definitions may be superior.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
S11
    S11
  • Thumbnail: Page 
S12
    S12
  • Thumbnail: Page 
S13
    S13
  • Thumbnail: Page 
S14
    S14
  • Thumbnail: Page 
S15
    S15