Abstract: Background　Accurate assessment of fatigue in cancer patients is conducive to accurately identifying the severity of fatigue in cancer patients，which in turn allows for more targeted development of interventions. At present，there is a variety of fatigue tools for assessing fatigue in cancer patients both domestic and overseas，but there is lack of systematic integration of the measurement properties of such scales，which makes the selection of assessment tools for rational and standardised assessment difficult. Objective　To evaluate the methodological quality and measurement properties of fatigue measurement tools for cancer patients. Methods　Studies on fatigue assessment tools for cancer patients were searched in CNKI，Wanfang Data，VIP，SinoMed，PubMed，Embase，Cochrane Library and Web of Science from the time of the database construction to May 31st，2024. These data was screened and cross-checked independently by two investigators，then the included studies were evaluated according the Consensus Criteria for the Selection of Health Measurement Tools（COSMIN） to form recommendations. Results　A total of 22 papers were contained，including：PedsQLTMMultidimensional Fatigue Scale （PedsQLTMMFS），Chinese version PedsQLTMMFS，Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Fatigue Scale（FACT）， Chinese version FACT（FACT-F），Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory（MFI-20），Chinese version MFI-20，CancerRelated Fatigue Scale，Cancer-related Fatigue Comprehensive Screening Scale，Self-rating Scale for Cancer-related Fatigue，Multidimensional Fatigue Symptoms Inventory（MFSI），Chinese version MFSI-Short Form（MFSI-SF），Fatigue Symptom Inventory（FSI），Daily Fatigue Cancer Scale（DFCS），The Childhood Fatigue Scale，Chinese version of the Children's Fatigue Scale（CF-C），Cancer Fatigue Scale（CFS），Chinese version of the CFS（CFS-C），Cancer Fatigue Scale（CF）， Brief Fatigue Inventory（BFI），and Cancer-Related Fatigue Questionnaire，Piper Fatigue Scale Revised（PFS-R），Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale（SCFS），totaling 22 tools for assessing cancer patient-related fatigue. As the content validity was uncertain for all scales and the quality of evidence was moderate or below，19 scales were recommended at level B and 3 scales were recommended at level C. Conclusion　The MFSI scale was recommended for the assessment of fatigue in cancer patients （recommendation level B），but the methodological quality and measurement properties still needed improvement.

Key words: Carcinoma, Fatigue, Assessment tools, Measurement properties, COSMIN, Quality evaluation

摘要： 背景　精准评估癌症患者的疲劳，有利于准确识别癌症患者的疲劳严重程度以及针对性地制定干预措施。目前国内外评估癌症患者的疲劳工具种类繁多，但缺乏量表测量学特性的系统整合，给合理规范的选择评估工具带来了困难。目的　评估癌症患者疲劳测量工具的方法学和测量特性。方法　检索中国知网（CNKI）、万方数据知识服务平台（Wanfang Data）、维普网（VIP）、中国生物医学文献服务系统（SinoMed）、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science中关于癌症患者疲劳评估工具的研究，检索时限为建库至2024年5月31日。由两位研究者独立筛选、交叉核对后，依据健康测量工具选择共识标准（COSMIN）对纳入的研究进行评价，并生成推荐意见。结果　共纳入22篇文献，包括：儿童多维疲劳量表（PedsQLTMMFS）、中文版PedsQLTMMFS、癌症治疗功能评估疲乏量表（FACT）、中文版FACT（FACT-F）、多维度疲乏量表（MFI-20）、中文版MFI-20、癌因性疲乏量表、癌因性疲乏综合筛查量表、癌因性疲乏自评量表、多维疲劳症状量表（MFSI）、中文版MFSI-简表（MFSI-SF）、疲乏症状量表（FSI）、每日疲劳癌量表（DFCS）、儿童疲劳量表、中文版儿童疲劳量表（CF-C）、癌症疲乏量表（CFS）、中文版CFS（CFS-C）、癌症疲劳量表（CF）、简易疲乏量表（BFI）、癌症相关疲劳问卷、Piper疲乏修订量表（PFS-R）、Schwartz癌症疲乏量表（SCFS）共计22种癌症患者相关疲劳评估工具。所有评估工具内容效度均为不确定，证据质量为中等或以下，其中19个量表为B级推荐，3个量表为C级推荐。结论　目前推荐MFSI量表用于癌症患者疲劳的评估（推荐等级为B级），但其方法学质量与测量学特性仍有待提高。

关键词: 癌症, 疲劳, 评估工具, 测量学性能, COSMIN, 质量评价