Search results

It doesn't have to be submitted in the call for evidence for it to be discussed. Committee members can still discuss whatever they want to, so long as it fits the day's agenda.

I see this sometimes in creative writing. Young writers who don't read very much, or at all, think they've stumbled across some great innovation, only to discover it's really not. It's all about arrogance and not doing one's research. Example: Writer: I want to write about a day in the life of...

That's my nickname. I've had it since I was 16. Then when I did drag, it became my drag name (Beyonce Holes). I used to perform (on the side of my writing career) with the queens from Drag SOS on Channel 4.

My middle name is actually David, too!

Yes. I suspect the LSHTM team will be on that already. But again, it doesn't hurt to send things in twice.

Thank you. I can't say more at this stage but I hope we can do everyone proud!

It doesn't matter how the evidence review experts see it. The decision rests with the committee. Don't be too disheartened.

Those are the ones. Thank you!

You can't send in individual patient testimonies (case studies, anecdotes, individual complaints, etc), but you could send in aggregate data (surveys, unpublished papers, published papers we might have missed). Data doesn't have to be qualitative, though I know that's the example given. The...

You could study which tools are most useful to measure a symptom or not, and how often symptoms change or evolve to suggest frequency of review. Basically, the question is: when should we review patients, how often, and by which measures? As for initial assessment: they're looking for evidence...

These are useful. Do send them in officially so there's a record.

Did they 'Go West' like this? Or even this? That does indeed make me feel more mainly already! All the bum slapping goodness...

I should also add that the committee can also raise things that fall through the cracks (e.g., anecdote, polls, etc) if they're relevant, so keep tagging me in things on here.

They have been incredibly thorough and I've been sending them studies too. But I would veer on the side of caution and send again, in any case. Duplication isn't really a problem. It's better that they have to ignore stuff they've already seen than missing out on something important, but that's...

This isn't true. As mentioned above, the Forward-ME/Oxford Brookes survey is specifically the kind of thing they're looking for here. You can send in any trial, including biomedical ones, which you think address the areas NICE wants further evidence for. You probably can't send in individual...

Interesting comment:

I believe somewhat formalised surveys (like the Oxford Brookes/Forward-ME one) probably count in this instance. It doesn't have to be RCTs. What NICE presumably doesn't want is, say, the maker of a medical device (or whatever) submitting customer testimonials about how amazing their device is.

Yes. As can any other surveys you think are relevant.

Some of that isn't too bad. E.g.: Also:

Yes, Truvada, the main ARV in HIV, can cause fatigue (and liver damage, IIRC).