| Name of the Instrument/Tool | Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS) |
| First Description |
Chalder T, Berelowitz G, Pawlikowska T, Watts L, Wessely S, Wright D, et al. Development of a fatigue scale. J Psychosom Res 1993;37:147–53. |
| Year | 1993 |
| Domains | |
| Concept of constructs | Fatigue |
| Population/Disease | Generic |
| Originally developed for | --- |
| Other rheumatic diseases where can be applied (only if validated) |
Fibromyalgia (FM), Spondyloarthritis, Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA), Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), Systemic sclerosis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome |
| Additional population with no rheumatic diseases |
Yes Chronic Fatigue syndrome |
| Language: Originally published in | English |
| Available in Language | Portuguese, Chinese, Japanese, Swedish, Korean |
| REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION | |
| Author/s | Chalder T, Berelowitz G, Pawlikowska T, Watts L, Wessely S, Wright D, Wallace EP |
| Title | Development of a fatigue scale |
| Journal | J Psychosom Res |
| Year | 1993 |
| Vol | 37 |
| Num | 2 |
| Pages | 147-53 |
| Country | UK |
| Language | English |
| Other references of interest | |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9835234/ |
| Brief Description |
Exploring the validity of the Chalder Fatigue scale in chronic fatigue syndrome |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20630259/ |
| Brief Description |
Measuring fatigue in clinical and community settings |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33091265/ |
| Brief Description |
Measures of Fatigue in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases: A Critical Review |
| Instrument/Tool Translations References | |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17324680/ |
| Brief Description |
Cross-cultural validation of the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire in Brazilian primary care |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20004305/ |
| Brief Description |
Construct validity of the Chinese version of the Chalder Fatigue Scale in a Chinese community sample |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19320199/ |
| Brief Description |
Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Chalder Fatigue Scale among youth in Japan |
| DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION | |
| Correspondence to | Trudie Chalder |
| trudie.chalder@kcl.ac.uk. | |
| Address | Academic Department of Psychological Medicine, King's College Hospital, Camberwell, London, U.K. |
| Website | --- |
| Available | --- |
| Links | --- |
| DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT | |
| Type Of Measure | Questionnaire |
| Brief Description |
Sometimes referred to as the Chalder Fatigue Scale, or simply the Questionnaire or Fatigue Scale, the CFQ was developed to assess the severity of disabling fatigue in hospital and community populations. The CFQ covers physical fatigue (eg, lack of energy, sensation of weakness, decreased muscle strength, and need for rest) and mental fatigue (eg, concentration and memory) |
| Number of Items | 11 items (covering two domains of physical and mental fatigue) |
| Range | Likert score: 0-33 or Binary score: 0-11 |
| Responses options/scale |
Yes - |
| Developed for | --- |
| PRACTICAL APPLICATION | |
| Method of administration | Self-administered |
| Recommendations to score |
Items can be scored in two ways. The first is on a scale of 0 to 3, with an overall score range of 0 to 33, a physical fatigue domain range of 0 to 21 (items 1-7) and a mental fatigue domain range of 0 to 12 (items 8-11). Secondly, the CFQ can be scored as a binary (less than usual and no more than usual = 0; more than usual and much more than usual = 1) and then added together to produce an overall score between 0 and 11. No information is available on the handling of missing elements |
| Score Interpretation | Higher scores reflect greater fatigue |
| Cut-off points | Likert score:29/33= discriminates clinically relevant fatigue from non–clinically relevant fatigue); Binary score:>4/11 = fatigue case |
| Cut-off points applied to | --- |
| Smallest detectable change if described | --- |
| Smallest detectable change applied to | --- |
| Completion time by the patient | - minutes |
| Scoring time by the assessor | - minutes |
| Training to score | Not necessary |
| Strengths | Easy to use, Useful in clinical practice & research |
| Limitations | Ceiling effect |
| OTHER COMMENTS | |
| Other Comments | --- |