Search results

Merged thread For the abstract of the paper and a link to it, see this post. The discovery that a chemical is deadly to the bacterium that causes Lyme disease but harmless to animals might allow the disease to be eradicated in the wild. “Lyme disease is well-positioned to be eradicated,”...

This is quite relevant to the evidence on GET/CBT where all trials are normally rated at high risk of bias because of lack of blinding. Busse and colleagues argued that it was wrong of the NICE guideline committee to disregard this evidence even if it was of low quality. In their view, this...

If I understand correctly, the author argues that systematic reviews are too lenient towards trials with high risk of bias (those with a red light in the ROB overview Cochrane makes) He argues that the appropriate way to deal with such evidence is not to add it up, but to disregard it: "The...

This is an interesting editorial in the European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: "Red for danger in systematic reviews?" by Andrew Moore The full article is available here: https://ejhp.bmj.com/content/ejhpharm/28/6/299.full.pdf

We've made a summary of the conference here: https://mecfsskeptic.com/a-summary-of-the-massachusetts-me-cfs-conference/

On Twitter the main author of this study said they are working on a ME/CFS study:

That sounds really horrible. Sorry, you had to go through this.

Is this a new research group? Don't recognize the names. Does anyone know them?

Thanks for posting. Unfortunate that it's soo long, won't be able to read it I'm afraid.

"The final model including both the negative cognitive errors and the unhelpful cognitive responses subscales together accounted for 52% of the variance in psychopathology symptom score." 52% is really a lot, perhaps the questionnaires are measuring the same things rather than explaining things?

Here's the questionnaire they used to determine the cutoff between ME/CFS patients with and without co-morbid anxiety and/or depressive symptoms: The Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) with 47 items. "Respondents are given 4 response options, which are scored on a 0 (not...

quote from the paper: "This was cross-sectional study using data collected at baseline in the FITNET-NHS trial."

Seems that this is the survey that might be used at the NICE roundtable on Monday. David Tuller blogged about it here: https://www.virology.ws/2021/10/15/trial-by-error-north-bristol-nhs-trusts-biased-survey-of-patients-attending-cfs-me-specialist-services/

Looks like a useful demonstration. Thanks to Chantal Somm and the volunteers of Millions Missing France for making this happen. This is a good video about it for those who understand some French.

Looks like this paper simply reports some correlations between symptoms and other questionnaires. The Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFQ) and PEM had a correlation of 0.26, which isn't that high.

The main results of the severely ill patient study have now been published but from I can tell, they don't mention collagen breakdown or hydroxyproline A Comprehensive Examination of Severely Ill ME/CFS Patients, 2021, Chang et al | Science for ME (s4me.info)

Here's a direct link to the website with more info about this petition: https://signformecfs.com/ If I understand correctly, the petition is only open for 4 weeks, until November 9th.

The study included only 36 patients through online advertisement recruitment. They say it is a longitudinal study but it had a time period of only 5 months. They then looked at correlations of answers filled in on online questionnaires. The correlations between symptoms and financial and...