Jenny TipsforME
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Is the only reason we think MAGENTA is ready to be published that a Bath employee discussed the results?
You' re welcome. I don' t know if there are others. These were the most active results from simple searchThanks so much to @Amw66 for retrieving the PR threads. I have taken some screen shots of relevant bits.
Don't know if DT or some of the S4ME founders will be able to look at them.
There were lots of useful comments, incuding our lovely "Bob" at #87, Keith G starting at #104, and @Dolphin did a fair bit of quoting/analysing as well. So did @Jenny TipsforME, but she's already on this thread.
I am going away for the w/e and should have been packing etc this morning.....so will probably not contribute to thois much in the next couple of days apart from next post.
@MEMarge was the person you spoke to a researcher on the project?
FITNET-NHS is also full of PACE references.The many references to the PACE trial may be inappropriate for this project
Can anyone remember the source for children cheating with? This does ring a bell, but do we have evidence from the research team?
"Prof Crawley (paediatrician who is a fan of GET) shared the results of various randomised trials. This included such gems as the SMILE trial investigating the Lightening process. Most of the trials she discussed, SMILE, GETSET, FITNET, etc use subjective, patient report outcome measures. I asked her if there was a trend in future trials that will incorporate objective measures to ensure that the small, modest improvements seen in such trials are not due to the placebo effect. She really didn't like that at all. She did manage to tell me that using accelerometers is not that objective and her young patients cheat."Can anyone remember the source for children cheating with accelerometers? This does ring a bell, but do we have evidence from the research team?
That certainly sounds like it needs understanding better. What was going on in the period 15/01/2013 to 10/09/2015? And why was the trial's start date retrospectively shifted, in June this year, back more than 2 1/2 years to Jan 2013! Did they not know when it was starting at the time it was starting?! Were any participants recruited prior to 10/09/2015, and just "rolled into" the main study? Could be legit reasons, but given the track record, definitely needs understanding.The overall trial start date has been changed from 10/09/2015 to 15/01/2013. 06/08/2018: Internal review. 22/06/2018: The recruitment start date has been changed from 01/09/2015 to 10/09/2015.
That certainly sounds like it needs understanding better. What was going on in the period 15/01/2013 to 10/09/2015? And why was the trial's start date retrospectively shifted, in June this year, back more than 2 1/2 years to Jan 2013! Did they not know when it was starting at the time it was starting?! Were any participants recruited prior to 10/09/2015, and just "rolled into" the main study? Could be legit reasons, but given the track record, definitely needs understanding.