Choline on the Brain? A Guide to Choline in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
http://phoenixrising.me/research-2/the-brain-in-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-mecfs/choline-on-the-brain-a-guide-to-choline-in-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-by-cort-johnson-aug-2005
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Latest ETA for publication of the PACE Trial results

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Dx Revision Watch, Dec 9, 2010.

  1. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK
    May be reposted if republished unedited and with source attributed


    Latest ETA for publication of the PACE Trial results

    Today, I have spoken to a press officer at Barts and also to the
    Communications office of Queen Mary, University of London (including Barts
    and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry) for an ETA on the
    publication of the PACE Trial results.

    I was advised by the latter that publication is not now anticipated this
    side of the New Year; that it remained to be confirmed, but the most recent
    ETA was understood to be end of January. The publishing journal is also to
    be confirmed, though the Lancet was mentioned as a possibility.

    The office has taken my contact details with a view to providing an update
    when more information becomes available and I will post any further
    information that might be forthcoming.


    Related information:

    PACE Trial website: http://www.pacetrial.org/index.html
    PACE Trial Protocol: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2377/7/6
    KCL website: Pacing, graded activity and cognitive behaviour therapy:
    a randomised evaluation (the MRC PACE trial):
    http://www.iop.kcl.ac.uk/departments/?locator=355&project=10068


    Suzy Chapman
    _____________________

    me.agenda@virgin.net
    http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com
    http://meagenda.wordpress.com
    http://www.facebook.com/MEagenda
    http://twitter.com/MEagenda
     
  2. Sasha

    Sasha Fine, thank you

    Messages:
    12,796
    Likes:
    34,258
    UK
    That seems odd - usually, researchers don't say where they're intending to submit a paper in case it gets turned down and they are embarrassed by the rejection. The normal thing is to submit it and only say where it's appearing once it has been accepted (is "in press"). But if they're talking about publication by the end of the year, it sounds as though it already must be in press, otherwise they wouldn't have any idea of timeframe.
     
  3. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK

    First it was supposed to be Spring, then possibly October before the BACME 2010 Conference then a rumour of early December and possibly in the BMJ.

    But what I was told, today, was not this side of New Year but possibly end of January (but tbc).

    I asked if it would be BMJ but was told possibly the Lancet, but journal also tbc.

    The FINE Trial paper was BMJ and open access. I would have thought the PACE Trial might also be open access which might make the Lancet less likely.

    There is some information here on submitting papers to the Lancet: http://www.thelancet.com/writing-for-the-lancet

    The Lancet's Online First page says:

    "Below are the latest Lancet articles published online ahead of print publication
    Many research papers will have been peer-reviewed and published via our fast-track process within 4 weeks of submission"
     
  4. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK
  5. Sasha

    Sasha Fine, thank you

    Messages:
    12,796
    Likes:
    34,258
    UK
    But those papers published online have been peer-reviewed and the authors will have been notified that they have been accepted, first for online and then for print publication. I find it odd that the authors appear to be saying where it will "probably" turn up. Either the paper has been accepted by a journal or it's still with the reviewers and in the latter case, it's odd that the authors would be dropping hints about who it's with, in case it is rejected and they are embarrassed.

    Oh well! I suppose we'll find out soon enough. :rolleyes:
     
  6. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK
  7. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK
    I am aware of that.

    My information was not provided by the CIs or collaborating authors directly. It came from the press office of Queen Mary's and is based on what information was apparently available to them, in the office, yesterday.

    It is unlikely that I would be able to obtain firmer information from the CIs themselves, who would likely refer me back to the press office. The focus of my enquiries was primarily to establish whether the paper was scheduled for publication this side of Christmas. It has taken four phone calls to obtain the information that the paper won't be published before the end of the year.

    Suzy
     
  8. Sasha

    Sasha Fine, thank you

    Messages:
    12,796
    Likes:
    34,258
    UK
    No problem, Suzi - I didn't mean to put you on the spot, I was just waffling on!
     
  9. pictureofhealth

    pictureofhealth XMRV - L'Agent du Jour

    Messages:
    534
    Likes:
    7
    Europe
    Are publishing details usually this vague? Or does it mean (she asked hopefully!) that the potential publishers either aren't that impressed with the paper, or worried now that the FDA, NIH and others are looking at a possible retrovirus and they don't want to be seen in future as the ones publishing out of date 'management' strategies and not being 'with it'?
     
  10. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK
    It's OK, Sasha. I'm as frustrated with the vagueness as you are but I'm not a press card holder and it can be difficult obtaining information from organisations' press offices.

    I started my enquiries, last week, with Barts press office. I spoke to three different people since no-one had got back to me with the information I was seeking. Eventually, I was told it was Queen Mary's Communications Office with whom I needed to speak - not Barts - and I was given a phone number. So it was only yesterday that I was able to speak to someone who was able to give me some information (as the owner of two health related websites).

    It may be the case that the paper has been reviewed and is awaiting publication and that a publication date has been confirmed but the press office has been instructed not to give out that information prior to the issuing of a media release, early next year.

    It may be the case that the paper has been peer reviewed for one journal, rejected and is still in the process of being reviewed for another journal and the authors don't yet know when the paper will be published but again, the press office may not be able/willing to give this information out - I don't know.

    But at least it doesn't look, now, as though the paper will be out before January, and possibly not until the end of January or later.

    The office couldn't clarify whether the paper would be published as open access (the FINE Trial, published by BMJ, was). I would have thought the BMJ and open access was more likely for PACE than the Lancet and behind a subscription/pay by paper.

    If I haven't received any further information by phone or email by early January, I'll give the office another call. I will also ask whether any information about a publication date will be released publicly before a media release is issued a few days before the paper appears in whatever journal has accepted it.

    Suzy
     
  11. Sasha

    Sasha Fine, thank you

    Messages:
    12,796
    Likes:
    34,258
    UK
    Thanks, Suzy - it's all very peculiar! And frustrating for you to get such a runaround.
     
  12. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Owner of Dx Revision Watch

    Messages:
    2,927
    Likes:
    5,939
    UK
    It certainly is. The researchers had given the impression that the results might be out in time for the BACME Conference.

    Then the Barts 25th CF Service celebration (held on 29 November) programme had said:

    http://www.bartscfsme.org/Documents/PROGRAMME 291110.pdf

    11.45am PACE trial: Is knowledge more useful than belief?

    (Professor White will only give outcome results if the main paper has been published)


    -------

    So why the delay until early next year if the paper has been sitting with a publisher since before September?

    Suzy
     
  13. oceanblue

    oceanblue Guest

    Messages:
    1,174
    Likes:
    362
    UK
    The MRC are now very pro open acces and projects submitted since 2006 are required to be published as open access papers, preferably on publication but otherwise with 6 months http://www.mrc.ac.uk/Ourresearch/Ethicsresearchguidance/Openaccesspublishing/FAQ/index.htm#P72_7452. PACE predates that, but as FINE, funded at around the same time as PACE, was open access I suspect that PACE will be too.
     
  14. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,689
    Likes:
    28,233
    Maybe PDW and co aren't used to the review process being slow. Perhaps in the past they have often gotten an easy ride with the BMJ, for example. If one looks at a lot of papers, it can take a year or more from submission to publication (they often mention when the revisions were submitted). And there can be a gap of a few months between acceptance and publication.
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page