BACKGROUND: The aetiology of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is still unknown. The identification of risk factors for CFS/ME is of great importance to practitioners. METHOD: A systematic scoping review was conducted to locate studies that analysed risk factors for CFS/ME using multiple predictors. We searched for published and unpublished literature in 11 electronic databases, reference lists of retrieved articles and guideline stakeholder submissions in conjunction with the development of a forthcoming national UK guideline. Risk factors and findings were extracted in a concise tabular overview and studies synthesized narratively. RESULTS: Eleven studies were identified that met inclusion criteria: two case-control studies, four cohort studies, three studies combining a cohort with a case-control study design, one case-control and twin study and one cross-sectional survey. The studies looked at a variety of demographic, medical, psychological, social and environmental factors to predict the development of CFS/ME. The existing body of evidence is characterized by factors that were analysed in several studies but without replication of a significant association in more than two studies, and by studies demonstrating significant associations of specific factors that were not assessed in other studies. None of the identified factors appear suitable for the timely identification of patients at risk of developing CFS/ME within clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Various potential risk factors for the development of CFS/ME have been assessed but definitive evidence that appears meaningful for clinicians is lacking.
BACKGROUND: The aetiology of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is still unknown. The identification of risk factors for CFS/ME is of great importance to practitioners. METHOD: A systematic scoping review was conducted to locate studies that analysed risk factors for CFS/ME using multiple predictors. We searched for published and unpublished literature in 11 electronic databases, reference lists of retrieved articles and guideline stakeholder submissions in conjunction with the development of a forthcoming national UK guideline. Risk factors and findings were extracted in a concise tabular overview and studies synthesized narratively. RESULTS: Eleven studies were identified that met inclusion criteria: two case-control studies, four cohort studies, three studies combining a cohort with a case-control study design, one case-control and twin study and one cross-sectional survey. The studies looked at a variety of demographic, medical, psychological, social and environmental factors to predict the development of CFS/ME. The existing body of evidence is characterized by factors that were analysed in several studies but without replication of a significant association in more than two studies, and by studies demonstrating significant associations of specific factors that were not assessed in other studies. None of the identified factors appear suitable for the timely identification of patients at risk of developing CFS/ME within clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Various potential risk factors for the development of CFS/ME have been assessed but definitive evidence that appears meaningful for clinicians is lacking.
Authors: Simon M Collin; Jonathan A C Sterne; William Hollingworth; Margaret T May; Esther Crawley Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2012-08-16 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Patrick F Sullivan; Tobias Allander; Fredrik Lysholm; Shan Goh; Bengt Persson; Andreas Jacks; Birgitta Evengård; Nancy L Pedersen; Björn Andersson Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2011-01-02 Impact factor: 3.605
Authors: J McBeth; B Tomenson; C A Chew-Graham; G J Macfarlane; J Jackson; A Littlewood; F H Creed Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 3.006