• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Coyne: Editor of JHP responds to misrepresentations by Cochrane author

Countrygirl

Countrygirl

Senior Member
Messages
5,468
Location
UK
https://www.coyneoftherealm.com/blo...tations-by-cochrane-author-in-mental-elf-blog

Journal of Health Psychology Editor responds to misrepresentations by Cochrane author in Mental Elf blog
by James C Coyne August 13, 2017
A Cochrane review author made a number of false claims in his Mental Elf blog post about why his manuscript about PACEgate was rejected by the Journal of Health Psychology.

Andre Tomlin, Editor of Mental Elf should accept responsibility for unfounded attack on integrity of editorial process at JHP.

Brurgberg’s misrepresentations defending PACE suggest he is unfit to be a Cochrane reviewer and that he is a source of bias in Cochrane Reviews of graded exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome

This incident lends weight to calls for release of data for independent reanalysis of Cochrane patient level meta analysis conducted by authors including Brurberg and the Principal Investigator of the PACE trial.

pacegate-alt.jpg
Brurberg’s statements and the responses of David Marks, editor of Journal of Health Psychology
In his post at Mental Elf, Kjetil G. Brurberg claimed:

I was invited by the Journal of Health Psychology to comment on their ongoing PACE debate. Realizing that some people might view my role in a Cochrane review based on individual patient data as a potential conflict of interest (COI), I consulted the editor on these issues before accepting the invitation. Shortly thereafter, the editor confirmed that he did not see my potential COI a big problem.
Click to expand...

Open the link for the rest of the article
 
B

Barry53

Senior Member
Messages
2,391
Location
UK
I think this sums up ...
Yet, in the thread of comments to his post at Mentsal Elf, Kjetil G. Brurberg compounded his misrepresentations.

The claim that I have nominated reviewers with known conflicts of interest is simply not true…

When asked to nominate reviewers to my own work, I find it important to suggest people who holds the needed distance to me and my work. As the distance increases, it becomes increasingly impossible to have a full overview of peoples’ social life during the last decade. I did not know that one of the suggested reviewers had been sitting next to one of the PACE-authors at a conference dinner, but I would not consider this as a serious conflict of interest.

Editor Marks replies:

Brurberg fails to mention that the same person (prof x) who sat next to an author of the PACE trial paper at a dinner had also been supervised by another author of the PACE trial paper for 5 years!

When the reviewer recommended by Brurberg was asked to review Brurberg’s manuscript, he declined, stating,

“I might have a personal axe to grind, and having been supervised by Michael Sharpe (who may or may not have anything to do with this manuscript) between 5 and 10 years ago I would probably be regarded as irrevocably conflicted…”
Click to expand...
... why this is likely so valid ...
Brurgberg’s misrepresentations defending PACE suggest he is unfit to be a Cochrane reviewer and that he is a source of bias in Cochrane Reviews of graded exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome

This incident lends weight to calls for release of data for independent reanalysis of Cochrane patient level meta analysis conducted by authors including Brurberg and the Principal Investigator of the PACE trial.
Click to expand...
 
Kalliope

Kalliope

Senior Member
Messages
367
Location
Norway
As a compatriot to Brurberg I find this very interesting (and embarrassing). Am also looking much forward to David Tuller's further work with this Cochrane Review Group. I smell a rat here..

Brurberg works for The Knowledge Centre for the Health Services in Norway which provides information to decision makers. The Directorate of Health will soon consider whether it is time for an update of their guideline for ME (where GET and CBT for now are included). I dread to think they might consult The Knowledge Centre before making a decision whether or not to remove the recommendations on GET and CBT :vomit:
 
Last edited:
Kalliope

Kalliope

Senior Member
Messages
367
Location
Norway
Esther12 said:
The idea that Knoop was free of COI on PACE?!!??!

Having said that... is there anyone who knwos what they're talking about here who is free of COI?
Click to expand...
And it was this same Cochrane Review Group who were described as "independent reviewers" with access to all PACE-trial data, right? o_O
This case has so many fishy details it's hard to keep an overview.
 
R

RogerBlack

Senior Member
Messages
902
Esther12 said:
The idea that Knoop was free of COI on PACE?!!??!

Having said that... is there anyone who knwos what they're talking about here who is free of COI?
Click to expand...

There is a (hugely important) gap between 'can be alleged to have a conflict of interest' and 'would, on the balance of probabilities be found in court to have a conflict of interest'.

A real additional problem is that many of the key players in CBT/GET have also published papers that look, on the surface to be biologically based.
But, those on the 'biological' side of the fence rarely have.

This can on the surface make it look like the first group are less biased.
 
slysaint

slysaint

Senior Member
Messages
2,125
David F Marks‏@newhealthpsych 5h5 hours ago


What happened @Maclomaclee? 'Forgot' to mention your @cochranecollab with @profmsharpe or concealed it at behest of @SMC_London? #PACEgate

DHaJZWAWAAE5b4x.jpg

DHaJZWBXcAQvRye.jpg

DHaJgj0XgAAxDc7.jpg

DHaJk8lWsAASSry.jpg

5 replies 16 retweets 29 likes

eta:
David F Marks‏@newhealthpsych


David F Marks Retweeted David F Marks

Another COI memory lapse - your paper with #PACEtrial PI Professor Trudie Chalder 2015 http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/46/3/8… #PACEgate

eta2: the link to stroke.ahajournals... page not found. Paper can be found here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25649798
 
Last edited:
A

AndyPR

Senior Member
Messages
2,516
Location
Guiding the lifeboats to safer waters.
@slysaint On Twitter, in case you weren't aware, you should have access to a drop down menu on each tweet, from there you should have access to an option to copy the link to the individual tweet itself, as shown below.
Screen Shot 2017-08-17 at 12.06.55.png

Paste that link in to a post here and the forum software will automatically load the tweet and display it e.g.
Pasting (without the CODE box obviously)
Code: 
https://twitter.com/newhealthpsych/status/898057464863764480
gives
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/898057464863764480
The only time this might be less than useful is if the tweet is deleted. Hope this helps. :)
 
Countrygirl

Countrygirl

Senior Member
Messages
5,468
Location
UK
W

Wonko

Senior Member
Messages
1,467
Location
The other side.
There is also a duration criteria – ‘the symptom of fatigue should have been present for a minimum of six months during which it is present for more than 50% of the time’. Far from ignoring medical conditions, the criteria explicitly exclude any ‘established medical conditions known to produce chronic fatigue’.
Click to expand...
erm...are they saying that fatigue lasting 6 months or more is exclusive to CFS (as defined by the "Oxford Criteria") - coz I'm fairly certain that's wrong, totally wrong, total bo@@ocks etc.
 
A

AndyPR

Senior Member
Messages
2,516
Location
Guiding the lifeboats to safer waters.
You must log in or register to reply here.