Psychometric and Clinical Assessment of the 13-Item Reduced Version of the Fatigue Scale–Adolescent Instrument
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatigue is one of the most common and distressing symptoms experienced by adolescents during and after treatment for cancer. The lack of reliable and valid instruments has prevented an accurate assessment of the trajectory of fatigue among adolescent oncology patients. The purposes of this study were to identify the items on the Fatigue Scale-Adolescent (FS-A) that distinguished adolescents with high fatigue and to identify the most sensitive and specific score ("cut score") in order to identify those in need of a fatigue intervention. Rasch methods were used to identify FS-A items that distinguished adolescents with high cancer-related fatigue, and results indicated that the 14-item FS-A could be reduced to 13 items. The 13-item FS-A was assessed for its psychometric properties, with application of the receiver operating characteristics curve analysis to the responses from 75 adolescents. The internal consistency coefficient was .87, and a 4-factor confirmatory analysis achieved good fit coefficients. The identified cut score was 31, with 66.6% sensitivity and 82.6% specificity; 16 (21.33%) of the patients scored 31 or higher. The 13-item FS-A has acceptable psychometric properties and is able to identify adolescent oncology patients with high fatigue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".