Search results

Abstract Background: Low back pain has been the leading cause of disability globally for at least the past three decades and results in enormous direct healthcare and lost productivity costs. Objectives: The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of exercise...

Just wanted to highlight that this paper, in contrast to previous exercise studies in ME/CFS, found no evidence of chronotropic incompetence or the inability to increase HR during the exercise test. They used 3 measures for this (%predicted HRmax, %HRRadjusted, and CTIpeak) and none seem to...

One caveat is that the variables aren't standardised z-scores. So the hazard ratio's are representative of a one unit increase in the specified variable rather than 1 standard deviation increase. I don't know why researchers do this because it makes it hard to interpret the effect size and...

Agree, there were only 5 patients in this subgroup.

The p-value is really small for ME/CFS given that only 40 patients from the UK biobank were used. The authors also wrote:

Difficult paper to read. I assume these are the main results? Anti-fagellin antibody responses against any type of fagellin were increased in patients with CD and ME/CFS compared to matched healthy controls (Wilcoxon tests, P=4.6× 10−10 and P=8.9× 10−10 for CD vs. HC-NL and ME/CFS vs. HC-UK...

Looks like they reported a mean EQ-5D 3L score of 0.47 for ME/CFS (the lowest of all diseases). But if I understand correctly, the one reported by Muirhead et al. is even lower with a mean 0.38.

They don't seem to report this in the abstract but the mean EQ-5D score was 0.38 for ME/CFS patients (the mean of the UK population is 0.86).

Coming back at this paper. Participants were assessed before mononucleosis (time1) during mono (time2) and 6 months after mono (time 3). The authors reported no statistically significant result at time 1 for anxiety (BAI questionnaire) and depression (BDI-II) but I think this is because they...

Edited by Ruhoy, reviewed by Bolognese.

Just noted that the evidence review of non-pharmacological interventions by NICE is available separately on Pubmed (meaning that most reviews will easily find it). Evidence reviews for the non-pharmacological management of ME/CFS: Myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy) / chronic fatigue...

It's a strange situation because we don't know what the correct data is. if I understand correctly, Wallman et al. gave the raw data to Larun and colleagues but no longer have it themselves. So we don't know if the original Wallman publication is right or Larun et al. or what explains the...

I believe it was the difference with controls expressed as a percentage of the baseline value.

Thanks for the analyses @Janna Moen PhD ! I do not have a formal statistical background but will try to comment anyway. I would say it is the interaction that we are interested in here. We want to know how the values of the patients versus controls differed as blocks progressed. Also need to...

The Wallman et al. 2004 trial was excluded because of discrepancy on how the data was reported in the original paper and in the Cochrane review. On page 131 of the thesis (page 152 of the PDF):

This was the result of the meta-analysis for the exercise trials review (page 171). The effect size is presented as percentage change from baseline with 10% used as the minimal clinically important difference. The overall effect and the one with the PACE trial removed was clinically...

The thesis includes a review of exercise trials which has the following passage: So the PhD student believed that all trials were unblinded with subjective outcomes and should therefore be high risk of bias. But his colleagues convinced him that there was no high risk of bias because it were...

Coming back to this study it seems to have two main findings when looking at the fitness-matched comparison. 1) ME/CFS patients had the same ventilation (VE) as controls but there was a difference in how they achieved this: patients had a lower breathing frequency (fewer breaths per minute)...

Most guidelines recommend tube feeding directly into the gut if the risk of aspiration is high as @SNT Gatchaman explained. It is unclear why Roy did not consider this. For example this one on Nutrition Support Therapy in the Adult Critically III Patient say: I also did not see it discussed...

Eating can also be combined with tube-feeding. So if there is malnutrition or the patient is severely underweight they should first stabilise his/her weight with, for example, tube feeding. Then they can try to treat the underlying problem. In other words, I see no reason why a physician would...