Brief Outpatient Rehabilitation Program for Post-COVID-19 Condition, Nerli et al, 2024 - with comment from T. Chalder

I know it’s a rhetoric question, but I tried to look at what they’ve said in the protocol.

I believe that they are trying to argue that they only said that 10 points would be clinically significant, as in «10 points is over the threshold for minimally clinical significance», but the threshold might be lower.

The problem with that line of reasoning, is that they stated that «similarly» to their value of 10 from another study, 10 was the threshold for ME/CFS.

So they are trying to say that they didn’t say that 10 was the minimal value for CID.

However, other papers defined CID as the threshold, so the minimal part is always implied.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9210237/

So their argument shows that they don’t understand what CID means, or that they chose to ignore the meaning because it suited them. Neither are very flattering..