Yann04
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
AFAIK POTS wasn’t excluded, just POTS wasn’t found in any of the ME/CFS cases they selected.
-
New Forum Software Installed (Still a few issues but reopening the forum) More details.
The effects of exercise on dynamic sleep morphology in healthy controls and patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, 2013, Kishi et al
- Thread starter forestglip
- Start date
That is also my understanding and the reason why as ME/CFS Skeptic blog details so well, a good reason to think that POTS may not be the nature of orthostatic intolerance experience by ME/CFS or an informative "label". If POTS was part of the exclusion criteria these conclusions would not hold anymore.
Utsikt
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
This is second hand information on my part, so I trust your knowledge on the topic.
Wasn’t the diagnosis based on a consensus rather than a set of criteria? Again, I’m very open to be corrected.
No. Everyone met the IOM criteria. Not everyone met the CCC criteria (largerly because of a lack of pain rather than anything else).
Utsikt
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Thank you for correcting me! Seems like I should go back and read the thread on the study, I’ve seemingly picked up a lot of misinformation from other sources.
Yann04
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I don’t think you have. I think you’ve just confused things that are very understandable to confuse.
Ie. confusing, no one in the cohort had POTS vs POTS was excluded due to selection
and confusing, patients were picked with consensus from “expert” MDs and then checked for which diagnosis criteria they fulfill, with patients were picked solely on basis of consesnsus.
Honestly two very understandable confusions.
Utsikt
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Thank you. I still want to get it right though.