Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by Dolphin, Mar 8, 2015.
Free full text: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21642850.2015.1014489#abstract
These criteria are similar to IoM criteria.
as distinct from SEID(?)
Not sure what you're saying?
They are using a different name and OI is notably absent.
They are an independent group and the paper was submitted before the IoM report was published.
Orthostatic intolerance is absent like you say. But if one has neurocognitive symptoms, one would automatically satisfy the IoM's criteria of neurocognitive symptoms or orthostatic intolerance.
What I'm wondering is, will there now be two different diseases with similarities in criteria but different names, one of which has ICC and CCC case definition and much research associated with its name, and one of which has none as of yet? Will future research continue dividing along these lines and using whatever name whoever is doing the research chooses? Will research reflect IOM rather than ICC/CCC? Is SEID in fact the chosen name and is the systemic laziness it implies to some of us considered a better option than chronic fatigue? The article here even features fatigue as one of 4 diagnostic characteristics.
I realize from reading many responses to the choice of the name SEID that systemic laziness is not what comes to mind for everyone, but I'm afraid it sounds even more ridiculous to enough others that if not for the legitimizing recognition of a certain collection of symptoms, this "new" illness is going to confront the same prejudice with respect to its new name. I'm not even sure how accurately SEID reflects the symptom it is trying to represent because of the way it was chosen to satisfy a consensus of experiences (of that class of symptom) in a heterogeneous population. How many healthy people think of the act of standing up or socializing for an hour as "exertion"?
I'm not going to try to answer this except to say that this latest paper by Lenny Jason probably doesn't have the status to be used for lots of research by itself.
As Dr. Bateman indicates, "The clinical diagnostic criteria in the report are core symptoms drawn directly from the published ME/CFS literature—much of which came from Dr. L. Jason’s works and the CDC multi-site study...."
"I hope we leave name change deliberations in the dust and focus on the people who are ill."
Before or after a name change? If before (for now) I would certainly agree.
Interesting to see this figure. Makes me concerned that the ICC may not be sensitive enough for all cases
Exactly... and not just healthy people, some medical professionals might think the same way.
From the chart, Fukuda is the most sensitive? It's more sensitive than the four question one which is similar to the IOM criteria.
The SEID criteria are broader (and hence more sensitive) than the empirical criteria as the empirical criteria involve only single questions from the neurocognitive. sleep, etc domains.
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.