Psychological well-being and illness perceptions in patients with hypopituitarism, Knoop et al, 2021

About hypopituitarism but mentions chronic fatigue syndrome.
Knoop is among the researchers.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11102-021-01131-w

 

Wow, I just... can not..

well, at least we are not only ones who are improperly psychologised anymore

 

Perhaps they should be allowed but only on condition that the psychiatrists or therapists provide responses to similar questionnaires to enable the patient to assess whether the "caregiver" is of suitable disposition, character, experience and qualification to reasonably provide for the patient's needs.

 

To "objectify":

verb

1. degrade to the status of a mere object.
   "a deeply sexist attitude that objectifies women"
   
   
2. express (something abstract) in a concrete form.
   "good poetry objectifies feeling"

​

Definitely the first one. Not a single objective question in any of those biased generic questionnaires.

A smart person would conclude that whatever is used to rate "normalization" is obviously insufficient. A not-smart person would make bizarre assumptions and argue that they are adding objectivity by having people answer vague biased questionnaires of no relevance to the circumstances.

And yeah, "inadequacy of thinking" is so absurd. Not the fact that someone that Knoop would argue this but that it is a valid concept with a "standard" questionnaire and passes peer review as not being absurdly judgmental and of no scientific value.

They never wonder why their patients always attribute to physical causes. Even when there is a known physiological explanation they still refuse that it must be a valid, showing clear evidence of pervasive refusal to accept reality and false attribution syndrome, assigning blame onto imaginary causes instead of the obvious.

 

The phrase

In a paper co authored by

For some reason the term "projection" springs to mind.

 

What they are implying here is that these people are somatisers.

 

These exist and can easily be used

 

I suspect that they are trying to clumsily grasp the cognitive problems patients face. Aka the brain fog type symptoms. Not read the paper. Life is too short.

 

One wonders if this type of cheap, quick research is being done to empire build as a way of providing 'evidence' that patients might benefit from our old friend CBT. That'd be my cynical thinking in that respect. Mc research leading to superficial Mc therapy 'solution'.

As for these types of questionnaires they ideally should only be used as a guide to facilitate assessments and perhaps periodic monitoring of interventions (medical and psychological) where appropriate and in partnership with patients. And ideally with objective measures too. They are guides. That is their limit. Facilitate a discussion often. And they should be discussed with patients as misunderstandings happen all the time. Errors are frequent.

Dishing out a load of questionnaires and creating a paper claiming it tells the world something meaningful is a nonsense. Complete absence of the patients voice. Researchers take all the power to interpret the 'findings' whether this has any resemblance to patients difficulties or suffering. But it was probably a cheap MSc or PhD

Weirdly if my cynical response about this is their 'game', then they fail (due to the obvious above) but also because it pretty clearly says to me: until we know what causes (insert medical condition), what the disease mechanisms are, when the first thing we find we correct in an effort to help/recover, is very far from the full picture. Medics are making a good effort with the tools they currently have. But there is much work to do. That's pretty much it. It's clear there remain ongoing difficulties for the patients and that needs figuring out. Pretty clear that delving into patients psychology will not be the answer

 

Perhaps we should do a study using questionnaires to find out?