Background: A recent article by Reeves et al. on the identification and resolution of ambiguities in the 1994 chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) research case definition recommended the Checklist Individual Strength, the Chalder Fatigue Scale, and the Krupp Fatigue Severity Scale for evaluating fatigue in CFS studies. To be able to discriminate between various levels of severe fatigue, extreme scoring on the individual items of these questionnaires must not occur too often.

This study assessed the relationship between illness intrusiveness, symptoms, disability and depression in patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). Participants were 16 patients with ME and eight patients with ME plus co-morbid disorders. The patients with co-morbid disorders reported greater illness intrusiveness than the patients with ME alone, but there were no differences between the groups on the other variables. Significant correlations were found between illness intrusiveness on the one hand, and fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, disability and depression, on the other. We conclude that ME is a disabling illness, which has a major impact on various life domains.

The controversies surrounding the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy and graded exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome are explained using Cohen's d effect sizes rather than arbitrary thresholds for 'success'. This article shows that the treatment effects vanish when switching to objective outcomes. The preference for subjective outcomes by the PACE trial team leads to false hope. This article provides a more realistic view, which will help patients and their doctors to evaluate the pros and cons.

No abstract

Over the past two decades, a small but growing number of rehabilitation programs for individuals with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) have been initiated. The aims of this paper were to review existing literature on these programs, to compare and contrast findings emerging from inpatient and outpatient programs, and to comment on the rigor and quality of methodologies used in outcomes research in this area. The studies reviewed herein varied widely in case selection criteria, program intensity, length of participation, program content, and outcome variables measured. Moreover, many were limited by selection bias, the absence of valid and reliable measures, and the absence of a control group. These limitations made it difficult to draw definitive conclusions regarding the effectiveness of any single approach to rehabilitation (whether