1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

History of NICE decision to set up 2020 Committee

Discussion in '2020 UK NICE ME/CFS Guideline' started by JohnTheJack, Aug 24, 2021.

  1. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,349
    TC is just checking a fact about the timeline for the guidelines.

    Any quick help appreciated. Links if possible to support.

    Why was there a review started in 2017?

    Am I right in saying 2007 committee reported. Same committee reviewed in 2010 said all is well. Patients called for new review. NICE at first declined, but then agreed after release of PACE data and reanalysis?

    If that is right. Are there any links to show it? If not, please what did it happen.

    Thanks.
     
    alktipping, Louie41, Levant and 4 others like this.
  2. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    21,809
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
  3. Sarah

    Sarah Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,494
    alktipping, Michelle, Louie41 and 5 others like this.
  4. Sarah

    Sarah Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,494
  5. Sarah

    Sarah Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,494
    I don't think Wilshire et al was published until 2018.
     
    alktipping, Louie41, DokaGirl and 2 others like this.
  6. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,349
  7. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,349
    Good point.
     
  8. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,349
    alktipping, Louie41, DokaGirl and 2 others like this.
  9. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,349
    I think he's going to say that it came after 'patient pressure' and the 'The strong message from stakeholders' is enough of a source for him to justify it.

    Thanks again Andy and Sarah.
     
    ukxmrv, Simone, alktipping and 5 others like this.
  10. Peter Trewhitt

    Peter Trewhitt Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,633
    I seem to recollect there were statements from NICE initially saying that they were considering whether a review of the guidelines was needed and then that they consulted with the previous guidelines committee or with some members of the previous committee, who advised there was no need to review the existing guidelines. However as always my memory is such that I am unable to recall where I read this.

    Presumably this consultation of the old committee did not include the lay representatives who had previously resigned over the final content.

    It was then at this point the charities, Forward ME, etc objected and that the political ructions arose, leading NICE to back down and agree to a complete rewrite of the ME/CFS guidelines.
     
    alktipping, DokaGirl, Louie41 and 2 others like this.
  11. adambeyoncelowe

    adambeyoncelowe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,731
    I don't think it was the PACE reanalysis. If you look at the NICE surveillance review in 2017, they flagged the IOM report, Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015) and Keith Geraghty's paper on patient surveys (see Appendices B and C from the links upthread).
     
    FMMM1, ukxmrv, alktipping and 12 others like this.
  12. Suffolkres

    Suffolkres Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,522
    NICE Guidelines must be assessed and aligned with any new legislation.
    So anything between 2007 and 2017.
    If not assessed against the new.legislation and Statutory instruments they are technically non compliant and possibly unlawful...
    Well that's what I stated to them on the phone in 2017.... they could potentially face a JR of the decision Not to review.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2021
    ukxmrv, alktipping, DokaGirl and 4 others like this.
  13. Adrian

    Adrian Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,478
    Location:
    UK
    I seem to remember the IOM report was really important as it came from a highly respected org.
     
    Sean, ukxmrv, Solstice and 7 others like this.
  14. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,393
  15. Stewart

    Stewart Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    238
    I appreciate I'm probably far too late to this thread to be of any use - but my recollection is that the 2017 review started because NICE was obliged to carry out a review of the 2007 guideline a fixed number of years after it was published. Initially NICE's surveillance committee reviewed all the new research that had been carried out since the last review (in 2011) and concluded that there was nothing to justify updating the guidance - which prompted an angry reaction from patient groups and other stakeholders. It was that reaction that led NICE to announce the full guideline review in late 2017.
     
    Hutan, ukxmrv, Art Vandelay and 9 others like this.
  16. Keela Too

    Keela Too Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    I seem to recall working on some response document with a tight deadline around July 2017. I remember as I was camping / glamping at the time and had to use a hotspot off my husbands phone to get online!
     
    FMMM1, Mithriel, ukxmrv and 8 others like this.
  17. Stewart

    Stewart Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    238
    Responding to myself here... I've just gone and refreshed my memory. NICE used to review all their guidance every 3 years. THE ME/CFS guideline was originally published in 2007 and was therefore scheduled to have it's first review in 2010. However NICE delayed publishing that review until 2011, so that they could incorporate the results of the PACE trial. The next review was then due in 2014 - but in 2013 NICE decided to create a 'static list' of guidelines that didn't need updating so regularly, and they placed the ME/CFS guideline on this list. This decision was challenged (as @adambeyoncelowe explained in post #10 of this thread) and in 2015 NICE consequently decided to bring forward the next review (which was at that point not due to take place until 2019) to 2017.

    And then - as I explained in my last post - in 2017 the surveillance committee claimed there was no need to update the guidance and...
     
    Hutan, Sly Saint, ukxmrv and 11 others like this.
  18. JohnTheJack

    JohnTheJack Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,349
    These are all good responses. Thank you.

    It is too late now for this article as he was finishing it when I asked.

    However, I do think it's useful to have the background on this, so am going to change the thread title.
     
    ukxmrv, alktipping, DokaGirl and 5 others like this.
  19. Louie41

    Louie41 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,308
    Location:
    upper Midwest US
    TC?
     
    Binkie4 and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  20. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,269
    Location:
    London, UK
    I guess Tom Chivers the journalist.
     

Share This Page