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 8th April 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Trial By Error: Lead Author of Cochrane’s New Bias Guideline is LP Study Co-Author

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic news - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Binkie4, Aug 31, 2019.

Tags:
  1. Binkie4

    Binkie4 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,334
    Binkie4, Aug 31, 2019
    #1
    Hutan, TiredSam, MSEsperanza and 18 others like this.
  2. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,316
    You cannot make this stuff up.
     
    Amw66, Aug 31, 2019
    #2
    Hutan, ukxmrv, MSEsperanza and 16 others like this.
  3. Peter Trewhitt

    Peter Trewhitt Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,662
    No amount of randomisation impacts on the high risk of bias when using subjective measures in unblinded trials.

    No matter how good or sophisticated your statistical analysis, if your data is subject to bias your results are worthless. Not sure this language is acceptable, but there is no way of getting around ‘Shit in, means shit out’.

    This is nothing but a cynical attempt to lend spurious credibility to bad research.
     
    Peter Trewhitt, Aug 31, 2019
    #3
    Hutan, MSEsperanza, rvallee and 17 others like this.
  4. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,154
    Location:
    Australia
    They seem to have left out the 'controlled' bit of RCT.
     
    Sean, Sep 1, 2019
    #4
    Annamaria, chrisb, Sarah94 and 5 others like this.
  5. Sisyphus

    Sisyphus Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    458
    Wait, what? I thought I was sufficiently jaded about the Fine and Fancy People, but Cochrane hiring someone who attempted to sell a pure scam (LP) as actual medicine? Credibility or shilling for scams, you can't have both.
     
    Sisyphus, Sep 1, 2019
    #5
    rainy, ukxmrv, MSEsperanza and 10 others like this.
  6. Philipp

    Philipp Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    222
    Is this because that dude has first-hand experience with how bias works and is therefore an expert?

    Does Cochrane know that LP literally entails standing on paper and shouting at it?

    Is all this a realityTVshow and the writers are just experimenting with how much they can get away with until their audience has a problem with their suspension of disbelief?

    ...can someone please break the 4th wall now?
     
    Philipp, Sep 1, 2019
    #6
    ukxmrv, MSEsperanza, Anna H and 12 others like this.
  7. ladycatlover

    ladycatlover Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,702
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    @dave30th Thank you very much for your post - dated my 71st birthday. What a great birthday present! :) :party: :emoji_beers:
     
    ladycatlover, Sep 1, 2019
    #7
    ukxmrv, MSEsperanza, ProudActivist and 9 others like this.
  8. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    As I understand it randomisation is to avoid selection bias. Other forms of bias need other strategies to deal with them. Randomisation is just one important tool amongst a good many important tools needed for properly run trials; the integrity of a trial is presumably only as strong as the weakest link in the toolchain.
     
    Barry, Sep 1, 2019
    #8
    Peter Trewhitt, Mithriel, ladycatlover and 2 others like this.
  9. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    There is a very good reason for this I'm sure, as this link will help to clarify:

    'PACE was not a "randomised, controlled trial" as stated by Chalder et al in their rapid response'

    https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h227/rr-26
    [my bold]

    Which is why, as I understand, the 2011 PACE paper did not describe it as controlled:

    "Comparison of adaptive pacing therapy, cognitive behaviour therapy, graded exercise therapy, and specialist medical care for chronic fatigue syndrome (PACE): a randomised trial"
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
    Barry, Sep 1, 2019
    #9
    MSEsperanza, rvallee, Peter Trewhitt and 4 others like this.
  10. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,154
    Location:
    Australia
    It gets better:

    PACE was originally described as 'controlled' in the PACE protocol paper (2007), but not in the main paper (2011). Which means that either the PACE authors decided not to claim controlled status for the final publication, or it was denied to them by the reviewers or journal editors.

    Either way I seriously doubt they relinquished that status willingly. Clearly they wanted that status for PACE.

    The word 'controlled' is mentioned only once in the main text, in relation to the PACE team's search strategy of the literature, and a handful of times in the reference section in the titles of some of the studies they cited.

    PACE was most certainly not controlled.

    Anybody claiming any kind of expert authority status who makes that claim has simple demonstrated that they are incompetent, or lazy (didn't do their due diligence), or a liar (relying on their audience not knowing any better and not doing their due diligence).
     
    Sean, Sep 1, 2019
    #10
    MSEsperanza, rvallee, Peter Trewhitt and 5 others like this.
  11. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Yes, I didn't want to laden my post with too much. I suspect there must have been rumblings between 2007 and 2011 that brought them up short. I've a vague recollection a reviewer maybe brought the issue up.

    Which makes you think: If a £5M trial was funded on the basis of its protocol saying it would be a controlled trial, but was in fact implemented without being controlled, is that not in itself a gross misuse of public funds? The funding was for a controlled trial. Would PACE have got the funding if they had described it more accurately from the outset, as a "randomised trial" rather than a "controlled randomised trial"? It sounds perilously close to gaining financial advantage by deception.

    @dave30th: Could there be any mileage in this latter point at all?
     
    Barry, Sep 1, 2019
    #11
    ukxmrv, Amw66, rvallee and 3 others like this.
  12. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,210
    Location:
    UK
    Trish, Sep 1, 2019
    #12
    Hutan and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  13. Sisyphus

    Sisyphus Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    458
    It is their job to know that, and they are responsible whether or not they bothered to find out.
     
    Sisyphus, Sep 4, 2019
    #13
    Annamaria, rvallee, ukxmrv and 6 others like this.

Share This Page