Sharon W Renner1, Todd M Bear2, Patrick J Brown3, Stacy L Andersen4, Stephanie Cosentino5, Theresa Gmelin1, Robert M Boudreau1, Jane A Cauley1, Yujia Susanna Qiao1, Eleanor M Simonsick6, Nancy W Glynn1. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry, New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University College Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA. 4. Geriatrics Section, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA. 6. Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Aging, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Establish reliability, concurrent and convergent validity of the Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale (PFS) Mental subscale. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Older adults from two University of Pittsburgh registries, Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), and Long Life Family Study (LLFS). PARTICIPANTS: PFS Mental subscale validation was conducted using three cohorts: (1) Development Sample (N = 664, 59.1% women, age 74.8 ± 6.4 years, PFS Mental scores 10.3 ± 9.1), (2) Validation Sample I-BLSA (N = 430, 51.9% women, age 74.5 ± 8.2 years, PFS Mental scores 9.4 ± 7.9), and (3) Validation Sample II-LLFS (N = 1,917, 54.5% women, age 72.2 ± 9.3 years, PFS Mental scores 7.5 ± 8.2). MEASUREMENTS: Development Sample, Validation Sample I-BLSA, and Validation Sample II-LLFS participants self-administered the 10-item Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale. Validation Sample II-LLFS completed cognition measures (Trail Making Tests A and B), depressive symptomatology (Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale, CES-D), and global fatigue from two CES-D items. RESULTS: In the Development Sample and Validation Sample I-BLSA, confirmatory factor analysis showed all 10 items loaded on two factors: social and physical activities (fit indices: SRMSR = 0.064, RMSEA = 0.095, CFI = 0.91). PFS Mental scores had strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.85) and good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.78). Validation Sample II-LLFS PFS Mental scores demonstrated moderate concurrent and construct validity using Pearson (r) or Spearman (ρ) correlations against measures of cognition (Trail Making Tests A (r = 0.14) and B (r = 0.17) time), depressive symptoms (r = 0.31), and global fatigue (ρ = 0.21). Additionally, the PFS Mental subscale had strong convergent validity, discriminating according to established clinical or cognitive testing cut points, with differences in PFS Mental scores ranging from 3.9 to 7.6 points (all P < .001). All analyses were adjusted for family relatedness, field center, age, sex, and education. CONCLUSIONS: The validated PFS Mental subscale may be used in clinical and research settings as a sensitive, one-page self-administered tool of perceived mental fatigability in older adults.
OBJECTIVES: Establish reliability, concurrent and convergent validity of the Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale (PFS) Mental subscale. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Older adults from two University of Pittsburgh registries, Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), and Long Life Family Study (LLFS). PARTICIPANTS: PFS Mental subscale validation was conducted using three cohorts: (1) Development Sample (N = 664, 59.1% women, age 74.8 ± 6.4 years, PFS Mental scores 10.3 ± 9.1), (2) Validation Sample I-BLSA (N = 430, 51.9% women, age 74.5 ± 8.2 years, PFS Mental scores 9.4 ± 7.9), and (3) Validation Sample II-LLFS (N = 1,917, 54.5% women, age 72.2 ± 9.3 years, PFS Mental scores 7.5 ± 8.2). MEASUREMENTS: Development Sample, Validation Sample I-BLSA, and Validation Sample II-LLFS participants self-administered the 10-item Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale. Validation Sample II-LLFS completed cognition measures (Trail Making Tests A and B), depressive symptomatology (Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale, CES-D), and global fatigue from two CES-D items. RESULTS: In the Development Sample and Validation Sample I-BLSA, confirmatory factor analysis showed all 10 items loaded on two factors: social and physical activities (fit indices: SRMSR = 0.064, RMSEA = 0.095, CFI = 0.91). PFS Mental scores had strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.85) and good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.78). Validation Sample II-LLFS PFS Mental scores demonstrated moderate concurrent and construct validity using Pearson (r) or Spearman (ρ) correlations against measures of cognition (Trail Making Tests A (r = 0.14) and B (r = 0.17) time), depressive symptoms (r = 0.31), and global fatigue (ρ = 0.21). Additionally, the PFS Mental subscale had strong convergent validity, discriminating according to established clinical or cognitive testing cut points, with differences in PFS Mental scores ranging from 3.9 to 7.6 points (all P < .001). All analyses were adjusted for family relatedness, field center, age, sex, and education. CONCLUSIONS: The validated PFS Mental subscale may be used in clinical and research settings as a sensitive, one-page self-administered tool of perceived mental fatigability in older adults.
Authors: Nancy W Glynn; Adam J Santanasto; Eleanor M Simonsick; Robert M Boudreau; Scott R Beach; Richard Schulz; Anne B Newman Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2014-12-31 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Sharon Abrahams; Laura H Goldstein; Andy Simmons; Michael J Brammer; Steve C R Williams; Vincent P Giampietro; Chris M Andrew; P Nigel Leigh Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Kelsea R LaSorda; Theresa Gmelin; Allison L Kuipers; Robert M Boudreau; Adam J Santanasto; Kaare Christensen; Sharon W Renner; Mary K Wojczynski; Stacy L Andersen; Stephanie Cosentino; Nancy W Glynn Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Rebecca W Cohen; Alexa J Meinhardt; Theresa Gmelin; Yujia Susanna Qiao; Kyle D Moored; Ryan D Katz; Sharon W Renner; Nancy W Glynn Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-03-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Nancy W Glynn; Theresa Gmelin; Sharon W Renner; Yujia Susanna Qiao; Robert M Boudreau; Mary F Feitosa; Mary K Wojczynski; Stephanie Cosentino; Stacy L Andersen; Kaare Christensen; Anne B Newman Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Min Kyeong Jang; Sue Kim; Chang Gi Park; Eileen G Collins; Lauretta T Quinn; Nancy W Glynn; Carol Estwing Ferrans Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 3.186