Yes, interesting and concerning. At least the article is in the rubric "Viewpoint".
Whereas... -- not sure if this RCP journal's "practical review" from January 2021 has been posted already elsewhere on the forum:
A practical review of functional neurological disorder (FND) for the general...
Is that related to this somehow?
https://twitter.com/NICEComms/status/1435634030196576259
https://indepth.nice.org.uk/methods-review/index.html#group-section-Share-your-views-67wiwXR1qw
Methods, processes and topic selection for health technology evaluation: proposals for change | NICE...
Invited Letter Rejoinder (response to David and Michiel) said:
So this large trial was only a preliminary trial? Is this how RCTs that fail to deliver the expected results are usually called?
But isn't that the point? The abstract's conclusion doesn't mention the null findings at 52 weeks/...
This looks very helpful not only for people in the U.S. -- but haven't read it yet.
In any case it seems to contain a helpful summary of some figures and references.
[including links to the references.]
Podell et al:
"The National Academy of Medicine also reported that patients with ME/CFS...
Thanks @Dx Revision Watch .
But I think it's still very much what Chalder et al claim about alleged evidence and and also what they offer to pwME?
Apologies for keeping recurring to rather aged stuff and forgetting things: But do we have a good reference on how issuing sick leaves and...
Binkie4 said: ↑
King's College London https://kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/depts/pm/research/cfs/patients/history
I wonder if it's worthwhile to write a detailed criticism on some of the most harmful parts of this evidence-free space.
see also...
Maybe a particular problem arises when neither impairments are assessed properly nor the estimation of possible improvements are based on any good evidence but only on non-evidenced assumptions on the nature of the impairments?
So on what scales would you base a rehabilitation goal for a pwME...
Threads on original research papers on cognitive impairment after COVID-19:
https://www.s4me.info/threads/cognitive-impairment-and-altered-cerebral-glucose-metabolism-in-the-subacute-stage-of-covid-19-2021-hosp-et-al.20959/...
Just to add the complete citation including the pubmed URL:
Clark C, Holttum S. 'A life I can cope with'. An alternative model of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for CFS/ME. Health Expect. 2021 Sep 2. doi: 10.1111/hex.13326. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34472690...
Science Media Centre London: Expert reaction to preprint from the CLoCk study looking at long COVID in children
2021-09-01
A preprint, unpublished non-peer reviewed data, from the CLoCk study, looks at the physical and mental health of children and non-hospitalised young people 3 months after...
Hi @PeterW , welcome to the forum.
I saw your question on Twitter.
I'm not on Twitter myself so hope it's OK to reply here.
It seems that you have a 'fresh view' and I think that is something to be welcomed in ME advocacy. Also, I think it's good that you ask for feedback.
S4ME may seem a...
Is that paper one of the PACE trial investigators' attempts at convincing clinicians that BPS research on ME/CFS is able to generate reliable evidence?
(I'm actually searching for another reference: If I remember correctly, in one of the PACE trial papers the authors concluded that they found...
He's also one of the persons who gave their expert testimony to the NICE committee.
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/GID-NG10091/documents/supporting-documentation-3
And another link to a useful source from which some sentences could perhaps be extracted for shorter responses:
Patricia Davis, Re: Management of post-acute covid-19 in primary care - A warning to Post Covid sufferers and their clinicians, The BMJ
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3026/rr-7...
Leave here another link that I hope is self-explaining -- I'm sure there is a Tweet somewhere that summarizes the the gist of this:
(HRA= Health Research Authority)
Trial By Error: HRA Report Does Not Vindicate PACE...
I agree that it's very important that Chivers wrote he didn't endorse the views he shared in his follow-up, even though I share others' disappointment that he did not dig deeper and did not confront the input he got now against the input he got before.
I wonder why it is so hard to understand...
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.