1. Patients launch a $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
In Brief: The Adrenal Glands and ME
The second in a new series of ‘In Brief’ articles, where Andrew Gladman provides a helpful insight into the science behind fairly common topics, exploring how they relate to ME/CFS. This time he discusses the adrenal glands and why they can be such a talking point ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

"Statistics and ME" by Malcolm Hooper (A critique of the PACE Trial)

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by Bob, Dec 5, 2011.

  1. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,448
    Likes:
    8,608
    England, UK
    I thought it would be helpful to post this info in a new thread...


    Here's a new critique of the PACE Trial, "Statistics and ME" by Prof Malcolm Hooper, which highlights and explains a few of the statistical flaws in the published Lancet paper...

    It also includes some interesting background info about how Hooper's critique was rejected for publication in the magazine of the Royal Statistical Society, Significance.

    It's quite dense reading, but I think it throws some devastating punches, esp re the 'normal range', use of the term 'moderate improvements', and the 'six minute walking distance test' results.

    It's published on Invest in ME's website...

    Webpage:
    http://www.investinme.org/Article435 Statistics and ME.htm?forumid=331851

    PDF version:
    http://www.investinme.org/Documents/PACE Trial/Statistics and ME.pdf
  2. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,448
    Likes:
    8,608
    England, UK
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2013
  3. Enid

    Enid Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,309
    Likes:
    838
    UK
    These are very interesting - thanks for good finds Bob.
  4. wdb

    wdb Admin

    Messages:
    796
    Likes:
    538
    London
    Thanks Bob,
    I thought Hoopers article was excellent, it's great to see him writing in a more concise manner but still really hitting home all the important points.

    It's terrible that they gave no explanation for it being turned down I really hope that they are pushed to provide some sort of reasoning or justification.

    I don't know anything about the journal but wonder if it was because was not purely about statistical analysis or because Hooper clearly showed his own bias with phrases like The PACE Trial is a travesty of science and a tragedy for patients with ME. Don't get me wrong I absolutely agree with everything he says but in this instance it may have served him better to have kept to demonstrable facts.
  5. biophile

    biophile Places I'd rather be.

    Messages:
    1,350
    Likes:
    3,988
    Good point, but the editor could have just asked for that sentence to be removed, rather than rejecting the entire document without explanation. Also, in the invitation the editor actually said, "What you describe as the tragedy for patients is our main concern." In other words, the editor seemed to ask for it, and got what was asked, and apparently didn't like it or was told by someone else to reject it. I appreciate Hooper's efforts for trying, unlike CFS researchers in general who seem too busy or too uninterested or too gutless to adequately respond to the PACE Trial.
    ukxmrv likes this.
  6. Battery Muncher

    Battery Muncher Senior Member

    Messages:
    182
    Likes:
    136
    Thank you, Bob, for flagging this excellent article up. Disappointing that it was rejected, but it's good work by Professor Hooper nonetheless. I suspect they never had any real intention of publishing it.

    I also agree with biophile that Profesor Hooper's efforts are exemplary. It's good to have someone like him, who has the courage to stand "toe-to-toe" with the likes of Wessely, and produce intellectually honest and rigourous criticisms of his work. Many others have not.
    ukxmrv likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page