Irony when you compare it with the fact that those doing the research have slap-dashed the methodology and the literature. And that of course one of the issues is perhaps that this is ‘par for the course’ because the timeframe to get it done and perhaps student already exhausted plus they’ve got to get it past their supervisor so defaulting to repeating old bad stuff is the easiest safe thing to do why reinvent wheel and end up burning out etc
mot needs to be brought up that you can’t just use normal methods such as focus groups gif those with me/cfs without learning enough about the condition to realise what adjustments will be needed tgat you are just tiring them so much you’ve coerced them into ‘going along with the conversation’ same with long, nonsense questionnaires with leading questions that make no obvious sense because the writer doesn’t get the condition and is looking for something hun their own head they haven’t made clear in their designed questions.
But sniping back such patients are perfectionist would be a classic poor answer they shouldn’t be allowed to get away with - that attitude would be stinky. Yet it’s theoretically I expect stood over and ensured any fair decent feedback has no input from patient standards etc
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.