Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by Dolphin, Sep 3, 2013.
Shows such sub-divisions have problems in chronic low back pain (CLBP). Also, highlights the problems of relying on self-report measures:
The therapists didn't have access to the activity monitor data when making the subdivision, but they did have a lot of other data, probably a lot more than clinical practice (these were baseline measurements for a clinical trial).
In terms of the SF-36 physical functioning scale:
Relatively active: 60 [45.0-72.5]
Passive: 45 [36.3-55.0]
To me, this would mean classifying people who still had a reasonable amount of functioning as passive. Passive meant you weren't encouraged to stabilise at the start of CBT, just increase, which seems problematic. [Although, I question having this approach to any patients].
This is a random comment they make:
I think there could be something to it. In which case, one approach would be to try to ensure patients do get help in their environment.
Unfortunately, a lot of those promoting CBT blame the support people get for keeping people ill.
and (from conclusion)
Another reason to focus on using objective measures in trials, and doubt subjective measures, one would think.
Thanks for sharing research reports like this and breaking them down into such digestible chunks.
Translation: We still don't know shit.
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.