Background: Since the publication of the CFS case definition [1], there have been a number of other criteria proposed including the Canadian Consensus Criteria [2] and the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: International Consensus Criteria. [3].
Purpose: The current study compared these domains that were developed through consensus methods to one obtained through more empirical approaches using factor analysis.
Methods: Using data mining, we compared and contrasted fundamental features of consensus-based criteria versus empirical latent factors. In general, these approaches found the domain of Fatigue/Post-exertional malaise as best differentiating patients from controls.
Results: Findings indicated that the Fukuda et al. criteria had the worst sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusions: These outcomes might help both theorists and researchers better determine which fundamental domains to be used for the case definition.
Keywords: Myalgic Encephalomyelitis; biomarkers; case definitions; chronic fatigue syndrome.