I forgot about this. I hope some people did listen in or it would give the impression that there is not much interest in such events. This would not be a good message, especially when complaining about the closing of the CFSAC.
I would have been more likely to remember it if they had mentioned...
I just came across the following. I have no idea how interesting or otherwise it is. I did know which category to put it into i.e. biomedical or psychosocial (there probably should be a third category).
It's open access...
So not the individual patient data review, which involves the PACE Trial investigators, among others.
The pooled data review first came out a number of years ago and then gets updated when comments are submitted.
I have heard on the grapevine a number of individuals put a lot of time and effort into reviewing the individual patient data Cochrane exercise for CFS review. I don't think that is the review that is being talked about in this article but I imagine the sort of comments raised made Tovey think...
@Esther12 often discusses how it can be problematic to focus too much on the argument about whether it is "mental" or "physical". I'm not convinced that these issues should never be raised but this is a good example that they can backfire and distract from important issues.
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.