Search results

Google gave me this: A corrective emotional experience, or CEE, is an event that disproves the negative beliefs about oneself that are formed by trauma. An example would be someone experiencing that somebody wants to spend time with them despite their belief that nobody likes them due the...

If we round those measurements to 80 and 70 %, and assume a prevalence of 5 % for fibro (probably too high of an estimate), we would get the following result if we ran the test on 1,000 random people: 665 healthy people correctly classified as healthy 10 pwFibro falesly classified as healthy...

What does this mean?

If I’ve correctly understood other member’s description of the process, NICE’s recommendation of non-curative CBT is not based on evidence. As far as I know, there have been no studies on non-curative CBT for ME/CFS. It was seemingly a compromise to appease the BPS supporters.

The lead author, McDowell, is a senior HTA analyst at HIQA. The Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) is an independent authority established to drive high-quality and safe care for people using our health and social care services in Ireland. Health technology assessment (HTA) is a...

More from Cochrane (my bolding in the middle): Assessments of risk of bias and synthesis of results Summary assessments of the risk of bias for an outcome within each trial should inform the meta-analysis. The two preferable analytical strategies are to restrict the primary meta-analysis to...

From Cochrane: 3. Assess the risk of bias in trial results, not the quality of reporting or methodological problems that are not directly related to risk of bias The quality of reporting, such as whether details were described or not, affects the ability of systematic review authors and users...

The used the original The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d5928

This is the protocol for the review: https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2023-03/Long-COVID-Interventions_Protocol.pdf

These are the categories of bias that were assessed: Randomisation sequence generation Allocation concealment Selective reporting Other Blinding of participants Blinding of assessor Incomplete outcome data All studies got a score of low risk of bias in the category ‘other’. Going by what...

As participants cannot be blinded to the treatment allocation in exercise trials, this domain is inherently at high risk among all exercise interventions. As this review was limited to exercise trials, this domain was not considered in the overall risk of bias assessment, so as to capture...

The cynic in me wonders if this was not done on purpose. You wouldn’t run the risk of disproving your pet theory, especially when you have a financial interest.

They should probably have mentioned in the abstract that none of the studies assessed PEM. ———— Postexertional malaise No studies in the current review directly assessed outcomes related to postexertional symptoms which sometimes occur among people with long COVID.4 7 PEM is characterised by...

The BMJ link doesn’t work, only the pdf. The PubMed link works, but the link to BMJ is also broken there. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40122540/ Edit: the BMJ link works now.

‘When you don’t account for all of the bias, some of the studies had a low risk of bias.’ How did this get published?! ———— Risk of bias The study risk of bias is presented in table 2. Briefly, when excluding consideration of participant blinding, four studies had a low overall risk of...

Thank you for explaining, that makes sense to me!

So in blunt terms, the cells are murdered rather than committing suicide?

In this specific case it would be because it has caused a tremendous amount of harm, not just because it isn’t successful. Edit: but it’s an interesting question!

Paul wrote about his experience for the British Medical Journal (BMJ). His last blog describing his recovery was met with many critical comments - saying his views were anecdotal, ‘pseudoscience’ not backed by scientific evidence, dangerous, irresponsible and ‘inexcusably unprofessional’. Others...

I’ve seen many BPS proponents that argue that There are no changes on a cellular or systemic level If there are changes, they are continuously maintained by the CNS, i.e. downstream effects of unhelpful beliefs, a stuck stress response, a mismatch between perceived capabilities and actual...