Trial Report Factors associated with having previously received a diagnosis of fibromyalgia, CFS and IBS: A cross sectional DanFunD study,2024,Tattan/Fink/Rosmalen

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399924001053


Factors associated with having previously received a diagnosis of fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and irritable bowel syndrome: A cross sectional DanFunD study

Tattan M, Ornbol E, Wellnitz KB, Hanssen DJC, Dantoft TM, Rosmalen JGM, Fink P, Weinreich, Petersen M.

J Psychosom Res. 2024 May 5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111693

open access

Highlights

• Received FSS diagnosis from a physician was strongly associated with female sex.
  
  
• Strong association between received FSS diagnosis and negative illness perception.
  
  
• Strong associations with poor health related quality of life.
  
  
• Weaker associations with lower SES, higher anxiety, and adverse life events.
  
  
• No associations with health anxiety, depression, kinesiophobia, physical activity.

Abstract

Objectives
Fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, and irritable bowel syndrome are highly prevalent conditions and part of the functional somatic syndromes (FSS) diagnosis, that are classified under the unifying umbrella term functional somatic disorder (FSD). Multiple factors are associated with FSD symptom development; However, few studies have explored these associations in relation to the diagnosis status. This study aims to examine associations with a previously received FSS diagnosis from a physician in participants fulfilling the FSD diagnostic criteria in a population-based sample.

Methods
This research employs a comprehensive observational approach using a cross sectional design with data from the DanFunD part two cohort. Information about received FSS diagnoses was obtained from self-reported questionnaires. Participants fulfilling the FSD diagnostic criteria were identified with both self-reported questionnaires and diagnostic interviews. Validated questionnaires were used to assess the examined factors.

Results
1704 cases fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for an FSD according to questionnaires or interviews in the DanFunD study. In participants fulfilling the diagnostic criteria, having previously received an FSS diagnosis by a physician was strongly associated with female sex, negative illness perceptions and poor health-related quality of life for questionnaire and interview-based diagnoses. Less consistent associations were observed for lower socioeconomic status, anxiety, and adverse life events.

Conclusion
Previously received FSS diagnoses showed associations with multiple factors with a particular strong association with female sex and poor health related quality of life.

Keywords
Associated factors
Diagnosis
Female
Functional somatic disorder
Quality of life

 

So, what is even the point of this? It adds absolutely nothing, there have been many poorly done studies like this before and they pretty much all show the same thing: nothing. Apply bad questionnaires, get useless responses. This is so obviously just bad researchers being gifted yet another useless paper (multiple, actually, this study has so far yielded, what, 10 papers?!) that won't even alter their views.

"Illness perception" is basically "people don't like being ill" relative to how ill they are. Of course being ill leads to lower quality of life. And whether a prominence of women means something similar to how autoimmune diseases are more common in women, or simply that misogyny being as strong as ever in medicine, it's simply clinical bias applying the old recipe of "women be hysterical". There is no way to tell here, the study is far too superficial.

It's a very poor study but even then it invalidates most of their usual tropes about "fear of movement", anxiety and other nonsense, but it won't stop them from insisting so anyway.

And of course all of this is on the basis of self-reported questionnaires, but many of the people behind this dispute the biological nature of chronic illnesses, including Long Covid, because of this exact feature, that there is no way to do external validation.

And they don't find an association with physical activity, but still these people, and the ideology in general, are obsessed with coaching those patients into being active. But that won't ever stop them from continuing to do, even though here they find again that it's not a problem. We keep seeing studies done on people with ME/CFS or Long Covid, mild ones of course, where they literally argue that the small improvements are probably because the participants are reasonably active anyway, but they're also fatigued because they're deconditioned.

Facts are irrelevant to this ideology, they truly don't care what's true or not, because the truth contradicts their entire ideology.

 

Yes the only things that were consistently associated with FSS diagnosis were female sex and poor health-related quality of life.

The other things they tested (Physical Activit, Kinesiophobia, Illness Perception, Anxiety, Depression, Health Anxiety, Adverse Life Events) did not show a significant association or only in the group where FSS diagnosis was made with a questionnaire rather than an interview.

It seems that the questionnaire-based diagnoses were based on scores on a simple scale. In the case of CFS, on the Chalder Fatigue Scale. The paper writes (my bolding):

"Participants fulfilling the diagnostic criteria for an FSS (i.e., FM, CFS, IBS) or BDS according to self-reported symptom questionnaires, were identified with the BDS Checklist by Budtz-Lilly et al [24], which assesses characteristic clusters of bothersome symptoms present within the last 12 months. Cases with FM were identified according to criteria by White et al [25], CFS according to criteria by Chalder et al [26], and IBS according to criteria by Kay et al."​

Reference 26 is the paper where Chalder and Wessely introduced the Chalder Fatigue Scale.

[26] T. Chalder, G. Berelowitz, T. Pawlikowska, L. Watts, S. Wessely, D. Wright, et al., Development of a fatigue scale, J. Psychosom. Res. 37 (2) (1993) 147-153.​

 

So they used the widest possible definition, and still got nothing. This is actually impressive. It's very hard to be this incompetent by accident, it takes decades of experience to achieve anything close to this. This is basically a broken clock that manages to never be right.

And it won't make a damn difference. They'll still cherry-pick whatever small studies and opinions validate their prejudices, and keep on getting funded to do more of the same studies.