TY - JOUR
T1 - The diagnostic accuracy of single-item scales in detecting fatigue in patients with cancer
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Lu, Yi An
AU - Chuang, Yeu Hui
AU - Huang, Tsai Wei
AU - Gautama, Made Satya Nugraha
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2024/12
Y1 - 2024/12
N2 - Background: Early detection of fatigue is crucial for cancer patients. Although single-item scales are convenient, their diagnostic accuracy remain unclear, and the variability across studies may affect generalizability. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of single-item fatigue detection scales. Methods: We systematically searched CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR). We also calculated the area under a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Subgroup analyses were performed to address heterogeneity. All analyses were done R (version 4.3.1). The study registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023457658). Results: Eleven studies involving 3509 participants were included. Pooled results revealed a sensitivity of 0.89 (95 % CI: 0.82–0.93), specificity of 0.72 (95 % CI: 0.63–0.80), DOR of 19.95 (95 % CI: 10.47–38.04), and an AUC of 0.90 (95 % CI: 0.89–0.91). Moderate to high heterogeneity was observed, influenced by variations in cancer types, study designs, and gold standard references. Conclusion: Single-item fatigue scales demonstrate commendable diagnostic accuracy, comparable to multidimensional scales. Despite study variability, they are effective for routine clinical use to detect and manage fatigue in cancer patients. Future research should focus on standardizing assessment criteria and optimizing the balance between simplicity and diagnostic precision.
AB - Background: Early detection of fatigue is crucial for cancer patients. Although single-item scales are convenient, their diagnostic accuracy remain unclear, and the variability across studies may affect generalizability. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of single-item fatigue detection scales. Methods: We systematically searched CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR). We also calculated the area under a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Subgroup analyses were performed to address heterogeneity. All analyses were done R (version 4.3.1). The study registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023457658). Results: Eleven studies involving 3509 participants were included. Pooled results revealed a sensitivity of 0.89 (95 % CI: 0.82–0.93), specificity of 0.72 (95 % CI: 0.63–0.80), DOR of 19.95 (95 % CI: 10.47–38.04), and an AUC of 0.90 (95 % CI: 0.89–0.91). Moderate to high heterogeneity was observed, influenced by variations in cancer types, study designs, and gold standard references. Conclusion: Single-item fatigue scales demonstrate commendable diagnostic accuracy, comparable to multidimensional scales. Despite study variability, they are effective for routine clinical use to detect and manage fatigue in cancer patients. Future research should focus on standardizing assessment criteria and optimizing the balance between simplicity and diagnostic precision.
KW - Cancer
KW - Diagnostic accuracy
KW - Fatigue
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Questionnaire
KW - Single-item scale
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85204390884&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85204390884&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104496
DO - 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104496
M3 - Review article
C2 - 39284518
AN - SCOPUS:85204390884
SN - 1040-8428
VL - 204
JO - Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
JF - Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
M1 - 104496
ER -