How big was the cohort? The small difference between the control group and the patient could be due to the small sample size.
And even if the cohorts are big enough, is the difference (98% patients, 90% control) big enough to tell us anything?
Copying @Simon M 's tweet here, as it seems the results are similar in the control group.
If correct, I'm really wondering if anything significant can be drawn.
What matters is wether people involved in the trial think that the treatment is ridiculous or not. I very much doubt that anyone thinking this is complete BS would participate.
How small compared to CBT/GET results?
Even if that is not the reason to switch participants to a different group, the simple fact of having this initial interview to assess suitability is in itself a big problem that compromises the whole trial. The conditions for eligibility should have been made public and should have been justified.
Very interesting. If physical function as described by patients correlates with real capacities, it confirms the suspicion that those who didn't do the test where not doing well ; and the results of the 6mWT would probably be worse if the whole cohort had done it (specially in the GET arm).
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.