The majority of this study was not done by Crawley and with the exception of the crap questionnaires used, most of the "main themes" found seem reasonable.
What does seem weird is the discussion about CBT - yes the study found that poor mood was associated with loss - no longer being able to do the things normal teenagers would do, due to illness. Yes this may fit a cognitive-behavioural model of the development of depression, but it cannot be fixed by CBT since the underlying causes for those cognitions eg loss due to illness, and behavioural aspects - functional limitations due to illness cannot be fixed because the cognitions/behaviour result not from a mental disorder, but an underlying physical disorder that cannot be fixed by trying to increase activity levels or being more positive.
The study also mentions "Activity management" which if done correctly, is of course PACING...
They then state that CBT may indeed be less effective due to this:
Clinicians should be mindful of the possibility that treatment approaches for fatigue, which emphasise establishing a consistent and achievable amount of activity every day, conflict with approaches that are helpful
for mood, such as engaging in activities that are enjoyable and/or give a sense of achievement. As young people concentrate on reducing activity to manage the CFS/ME, the paradoxical effect is that they do fewer enjoyable activities and are likely to have a sense that they have achieved less, which could compound their low mood.
They also state:
Further research needs to be done to develop treatment approaches that can be effective in the presence of both CFS/ME and depression, based on existing knowledge of the usefulness of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and CBT.
Yet SSRIs have consistently FAILED to demonstrate efficacy for depression in CFS or ME patients in blinded clinical trials, notably in contrast to other anti-depressants. Apparently they didn't bother to review the literature before stating this.