(Not a recommendation) Bath University, Volunteer for research investigating Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Patients just need a bit of “shopping therapy” to help improve their mood? Lift a grocery bag to overcome a fear of exercise?

Cognitive and behavioral “treatments” on a budget.

 

"Coming to a Poundland near you . . ."

 

Could have been worse... They might have asked patients to listen to this.

 

at what point does their institution care?
or the funder?

or any person who doesn't have a friend/family with The Disease?

 

"You will receive a £10 voucher and contribution towards travel as a thank you for taking part in the study."
you might even get a free shopping bag(?)

eta: if they threw in a months grocery shopping it might be a bigger incentive

 

Are you describing the latest version of Supermarket Sweep?

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale's_Supermarket_Sweep

 

I know nothing about that. But perhaps it explains the failure of GET. What they need is prizes.

 

Although the project is supervised by Dr Daniels, the Lead Researcher for this project is Samantha Lloyd.

She co-authored this:
Corrigendum to “Telephone-based guided self-help for adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome: A non-randomised cohort study” [Behav Res Ther 50 (5) (2012) 304–312]
with none other than Trudie Chalder

https://www.researchgate.net/public...cohort_study_Behav_Res_Ther_50_5_2012_304-312

 

Corrigendum:

1. An error to be corrected, especially a printer's error.
2. corrigenda A list of errors in a book along with theircorrections.

from:
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/corrigendum

Well, there's a new one....

 

The page has an error code on it?

 

That's weird. It has been taken off-line. It's been archived here: https://web.archive.org/web/2018042...earch-investigating-chronic-fatigue-syndrome/

 

if they could film you carrying it lol

 

Indeed, we got lucky this was saved so quickly on the Internet Archive

 

I guess they can't claim that "perfectionism" is necessarily "mal-adaptive" when it comes to meaningful outcomes now.

 

What a complete and total cluster***!

Wonder what prompted them to own up to the massive error? Moral courage? Fear of getting found out? Someone important noticing something fishy? Its fascinating to speculate!

 

You would think that the original findings would have caused them to double and treble check the conclusions - unless they were more than happy with them.

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1075041059418333184

 

Kind of telling that the purpose is policy development, rather than, you know, actually helping people, especially in the context of a review that was forced because there were so many complaints (this detail is really getting lost IMO).

Supply-side medicine, patients need not apply.

 

"I look forward to the opportunity to contribute to scientifically-robust policy development in the field, particularly from a psychologically informed perspective."

Is that an oxymoron.