Search results

Could be but doubt it. Would be interested in seeing that protocol if it exists. Even the bad guidelines that we discussed here on S4ME and that do not want to medicalise functional problems are not that bad that they would recommend against trying PEG-J or TPN if there is a clear risk of...

The news articles make it sound like the main problem was that there are no ME specialist clinics and that the doctors did not have experience with ME. From what I picked up from the inquest, the problem was that the doctors had heard of ME and believed that they should not try to medicalise...

Thanks, I'm concerned that the Coroner is taking Dr. Roy's explanation for the truth, while this should have been treated as the heart of the matter and scrutinised by independent experts. From reading guidelines on enteral feeding it is very hard to believe that there were no other options...

I think this is plain wrong. Guidelines recommend going to NJ if NG is not tolerated. This is common in gastroparesis where the stomach doesn't tolerate the feeding but the gut often does. There are also other options such as PEG-J or Jejunostomy with lower risk of aspiration. And if all that...

Pain measured on a visual analogue scale going from 0 to 100. The main effect MD-15.2, 95% CI-18.3 to -12.2 close to the minimal clinically important difference of 15 points. The effect for functional limitations (MD -6.8 (95% CI -8.3 to -5.3)) was lower than the minimal clinically important...

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...