Hi Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I was looking at the wesbite above and I came across the National Outcomes Database (NOD) 2012. http://www.bacme.info/document_uploads/NOD/NOD data report 2012_02.xls from the website http://www.bacme.info/nod/. If you click on tabs at the bottom comparing the NOD vs PACE you can see that the following info: These tables show how changes in mean scores at assessment and 12 months later compare with PACE trial results (APT = Adaptice Pacing Therapy; CBT = Cognitive Behavioural Therapy; GET = Graded Exercise Therapy; SMC = Standard Medical Care) Fatigue (Chalder) PACE APT 28.5 23.1 -5.4 PACE CBT 27.7 20.3 -7.4 PACE GET 28.2 20.6 -7.6 PACE SMC 28.3 23.8 -4.5 NOD 26.3 19.8 -6.6 Physical function (SF-36) PACE APT 37.2 45.9 +8.7 PACE CBT 39.0 58.2 +19.2 PACE GET 36.7 57.7 +21.0 PACE SMC 39.2 50.8 +11.6 NOD 41.9 46.6 +4.7 The NOD's data shows that after 12 months on the Chalder Fatigue patients decreased from 26.3 to 19.8 (which is pretty in line with the PACE trial). However, compare that to the SF36 questionnaire and the mean went from 41.9 to 46.6, which doesn't really compare to the PACE trial. Its actually lower than APT and SMC, which I think the PACE trial shows are not cost effective. Bearing in mind that over 4000 patients were were interviewed over 30 different clinical teams.