What about the argument that strictly defined ME/CFS with clear PEM would have been more likely to have shown adverse effects in GET/CBT trials. That might overshadow any positive results and explain why the BPS people preferred to focus on broad criteria with unexplained fatigue.
As Jonathan...
There are a couple of studies that looked at people referred to specialist centres with a suspicion of ME/CFS and around 50% did not meet ME/CFS criteria (it did not seem like solely a problem of the criteria). The non-ME/CFS group included conditions like depression, sleep disorders...
The authors have published a rapid response yesterday:
https://www.bmj.com/content/387/bmj-2024-081318/rapid-responses
Very disappointing and ignores the point about imprecision.
Thanks! I've forgotten we had access to his response. Re-reading this a couple of years later, it seems his reply was quite unhelpful.
His advice to dichotomise a continuous measure and then rating the certainty of a non-zero effect seems to go against basic statistical principles. Zero is not...
Yes I think the authors of the individual trials being included is a recognition for their data being used. The fact that Galsziou was senior author is more surprising. I hope he wasn't involved in the decisions about the update and its cancellation because as senior author he clearly was an...
His main arguments seem to be that recruitment was biased towards ME Association members or people affiliated with it and that it did not include patients who have recovered.
But even if this was only a subgroup who had bad experiences with current services, it would be cause of concern (e.g...
Got the same impression when looking into psychosomatic theory for other diseases.
It was usually presented as a progressive view and contrasted with genetic determinism. People like Kubler-Ross and Bettelheim believed that patients with schizophrenia/autism had no biological abnormalities...
Yes but even in this area it does not look impressive. The RECOVER study on ME/CFS post-covid did not include medical examinations so it was worse than the EBV studies we have.
Quote from the retraction watch article:
Back in 2019, we made an overview of guidelines and policies that referred to the GET review here:
https://www.s4me.info/threads/the-influence-of-the-cochrane-review-on-get.11768/
I noticed that Lillebeth Larun has now responded to a comment:
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD003200.pub9/detailed-comment/en?messageId=446137675
Thanks for all the comments and suggestions. We have just posted the following poll on social media based on 3 options that we like the best thus far.
Which name should we choose for our account and blog?
1) ME/CFS Science
2) ME/CFS In Depth
3) Science unravelled
4) None of the above (keep...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.