Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Turkish version of the Cancer Fatigue Scale in patients with breast cancer

Abstract

Background/aim: The Cancer Fatigue Scale (CFS) was developed to evaluate the severity of fatigue in patients with breast cancer. The aim of this study is to translate and culturally adapt a Turkish version and investigate the validity and reliability of the CFS in Turkish patients with fatigue symptoms. Materials and methods: Eighty participants completed the Turkish version of the CFS for breast cancer and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire ″Core 30″ (EORTC QLQ-C30). Test-retest reliability was evaluated by repeating the CFS with a 7-day interval. Results: The CFS demonstrated high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95) and good internal consistency (Cronbach′s alpha = 0.74) for all domains. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was found to be 0.819, which is considered to be satisfactory (>0.5). Correlations between domains of CFS physical and EORTC physical (r: 0.77), CFS cognitive and EORTC cognitive (r: 0.70), and CFS physical and EORTC fatigue (r: 0.80) were found to be significant. Conclusion: The Turkish version of the CFS is a reliable and valid instrument to assess physical, effective, and cognitive dimensions of fatigue. The CFS may be used to evaluate the severity of fatigue in Turkish-speaking breast cancer patients.

The relationship between rumination, fatigue and psychological resilience among cancer survivors

“…Higher total scores are indicative of higher levels of fatigue. Cronbach's α of this scale was .74 in Şahin et al’s (2018) validation study and .80 in this study.…”

Quality assessment criteria: psychometric properties of measurement tools for cancer related fatigue

“…Only 23 studies (29.8%) provided information about criterion validity. Of these, 16 studies demonstrated positive (21%) criterion validity [21,27,33,38,[42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52] and just seven (9%) received an indeterminate rating [37,[53][54][55][56][57][58]. The remaining 54 (70%) studies did not provide information related to criterion validity.…”

“…The CFS was translated into English but not tested psychometrically. Other translations include Chinese [25], Dutch [96], Turkish [52] and Greek [49] with good reliability (0.74-0.91). Based on the review findings, the CFS met the quality assessment criteria for content, construct and criterion validity as well as internal consistency.…”

Brazilian Version of Cancer Fatigue Scale: Validation of the Brazilian Version of Cancer Fatigue Scale in Patients With Breast Cancer

“…9e11 Therefore, we decide to translate and validate the CFS because of its compactness, it is brief, it is easy to complete, 12 and besides it is a widely used instrument for the evaluation of cancer patients, classified as an excellent tool because it contains the main domains of the fatigue with a high reliable and excellent psychometric properties. 13 The CFS was developed in Japan, 14 and the validity and reliability has been tested in Iranian language, 15 Chinese, 12 German, 13 Greek, 16 Turkish, 17 and Persian. 18 The CFS consists of 15 items that assess fatigue in three domains: physical (seven items), affective (four items), and cognitive (four items).…”