I don't think that point about overlapping arms is right: according to your ref (and others I've seen) arms can overlap by half a length and still be statistically significant at 95%. As I was trying to say in the earlier post, since SMC has a higher baseline than GET/CBT you can't directly compare the 52-week end points. IC SMC data: 52.1-39.1=+13.1 Full cohort: 50.8-39.3=+11.6 (nb lower increase for SMC full cohort) Having done a quite a bit of work to get this data, I wish the results had been more 'interesting', but this is the way they turned out. Intersting that the effect with fatigue appears to be quite a bit stronger than for physical functioning, which is seen in the full cohort too. Not sure how much difference adjusting makes in practice. The difference between CBT/GET and SMC I calculated from the graph data almost exactly matched the adjusted difference figure in table 3.