Contrasting case definitions: The ME International Consensus Criteria vs. the Fukuda et al. CFS Criteria

Abigail A. Brown*, Leonard A. Jason, Meredyth A. Evans, Samantha Flores

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

17 Scopus citations

Abstract

This article contrasts the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis International Consensus Criteria (ME-ICC; Carruthers et al., 2011) with the Fukuda et al. (1994) CFS criteria. Findings indicated that the ME-ICC case definition criteria identified a subset of patients with more functional impairments and physical, mental and cognitive problems than the larger group of patients meeting the Fukuda et al. (1994) criteria. The sample of patients meeting ME-ICC criteria also had significantly greater rates of psychiatric comorbidity. These findings suggest that utilizing the MEICC may identify a more homogenous group of individuals with more severe symptomatology and functional impairment. Implications of the high rates of psychiatric comorbidity found in the ME-ICC sample are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)103-120
Number of pages18
JournalNorth American Journal of Psychology
Volume15
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 2013

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Psychology(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Contrasting case definitions: The ME International Consensus Criteria vs. the Fukuda et al. CFS Criteria'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this