Indeed. If you are filling in a 'survey' but it is also actually acting as a report as to whether your health is getting better or worse and will be going back to your GP or importantly to employers, then it isn't actually just what it purports to be. It is someone in an impossible situation with all sorts of pressures coming from all sorts of angles.
In fact even an online survey if someone is identifiable still has problems, it is just there might be a few more whose balance of coercive situation/delusion because they believed 'they'll be one of the ones who recover... any day now, if they keep going' might include just a few more people who it has now backfired on and left them even worse long-term and have stopped being silenced by it, because they realise the silence to protect themselves didn't help them either. But not all.
These people know they are still stuck with this illness long-term and the dystopia of the system they have to act carefully with to keep themselves safe from (forget the term 'care') for their entire lives. The impact part of the risk= likelihood vs impact has been made so huge and so unfixable because notes aren't removed and go all over the place we all live under what can only be accurately described as a tyranny. Until feedback is only counted if it is being administered in a way that keeps those replying definitely safe from this, we always have to assume any results are only measuring the impact of those pressures.
First there is still that ongoing, well-acknowledged by everyone, truth that you don't upset your HCP and then end up with a dodgy letter that affects future medical care or ends up with inaccurate labels of non-compliance being suggested. When that HCP is convinced the treatment 'always works as long as the patient was behaving and doing it right and isn't lying' then that person knows that reporting the treatment as 'not worked' is actually stating or suggesting to someone with power that they secretly did something wrong.
then, regarding employment, it needs to be read alongside proper independently done deep research from someone talking to those who are looking back and describing the situational factors. It must be retrospective because of the gaslighting at the time and the so extreme it is hard to describe anywhere near the level for someone to imagine utter washing-machine of constant admin that if you get wrong has life-changing impacts.
It is about time it is done. And I'm not sure it is medicine/allied that need to be doing it, but maybe from a more legally type subject area. SO it takes the discussion away from the 'did they didn't they have something making them that ill' or nonsense from sensitive people working in that area 'claiming outrage because they didn't put someone in that situation [on their own]', into just describing the only choice list of no-win options and how bad all of them are. And the pressures and misinformation that combine into this.