Severe ME Day of Understanding and Remembrance: Aug. 8, 2017
Determined to paper the Internet with articles about ME, Jody Smith brings some additional focus to Severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Day of Understanding and Remembrance on Aug. 8, 2017 ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Studies on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Graded Exercise Therapy for ME/CFS are misleading

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by Tom Kindlon, Oct 21, 2016.

  1. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,377
    Likes:
    8,244
    I thought this was very good

    Full text in English: https://goo.gl/wSMO7a
    i.e.
    https://www.researchgate.net/public...ded_Exercise_Therapy_for_MECFS_are_misleading

     
    Barry53, Cohen2, Jan and 24 others like this.
  2. snowathlete

    snowathlete

    Messages:
    3,312
    Likes:
    14,610
    UK
    I agree. I read it and it's very good.
     
    Johannawj, trishrhymes, Yogi and 8 others like this.
  3. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes:
    9,860
    Any paper which concludes
    Is bound to be good :)

    Can we have more of these ?
     
    Jan, Woolie, Grigor and 11 others like this.
  4. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,377
    Likes:
    8,244
     
    Jan likes this.
  5. medfeb

    medfeb Senior Member

    Messages:
    470
    Likes:
    1,853
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2016
    trishrhymes, Yogi, BurnA and 2 others like this.
  6. trishrhymes

    trishrhymes Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes:
    17,870
    Excellent article. I'd have liked to see mention that FINE and the PACE followup showed no between group differences, and the latest PACE data release, but we can't have everything! There's plenty here to completely demolish the biopsychosocial model. Now how do we get all doctors to read it!
     
    Jan and A.B. like this.
  7. Yogi

    Yogi Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,131
    Likes:
    6,885
    This is excellent. However will doctors pay attention to it as it not in "peer reviewed journal" and not by a medical doctor?

    It should not really matter as it is the quality of the paper that counts rather than who wrote it and where. However the medical profession is very backward in its thinking and defers too much to authority.
     
    GreyOwl, Jan, alex3619 and 1 other person like this.
  8. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,377
    Likes:
    8,244
    http://socialmedicinsktidskrift.se/index.php/smt/pages/view/in_english
     
    AndyPR, trishrhymes and Yogi like this.
  9. Yogi

    Yogi Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,131
    Likes:
    6,885
    @tomkindlon thanks for that info as I did not click on the swedish links and did not see that.

    Whilst I am responding here- thanks a lot for all your hard work on ME and with writing to journals etc that you have done over the years !!
     
    Jan, AndyPR, BurnA and 3 others like this.
  10. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,671
    Likes:
    28,172
  11. Anne

    Anne Senior Member

    Messages:
    295
    Likes:
    723
    I encourage everyone to read and spread this article, it's a great review of the issues.
     
    mango, Daisymay and Dolphin like this.
  12. BurnA

    BurnA Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes:
    9,860
    @charles shepherd just a quick general question if you have a moment : can papers like this be used as new research for NICE consideration ?
    Thanks.
     
    Daisymay likes this.
  13. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    883
    Likes:
    2,864
    This is not research as such.
    It is more an extended letter to the editor - the publication of these may be quite a low bar, and may not need to pass any peer review.
    Any peer review that does happen is of the 'it's not clearly wrong' sort - and it catches the attention of the editor to be published.

    This is not of itself evidence a properly conducted clinical review should use - it's one persons opinion, backed by a selection of previously published papers, and does not of itself add anything to the sum of knowledge on CFS/ME/SEID/'there's nothing bloody wrong with you, you're just faking it'.

    It can contain arguments they should look at in weighing the existing evidence.

    Evidence a clinical treatment guideline review is supposed to take into account varies from:
    Clinical trials with adequate numbers of patients to robustly determine the effect of that treatment.
    Evidence around if those trials are properly conducted.
    Research into the way the disease changes the state of the human body.
    Inferences that can be securely drawn from the first two into likely results of treatments and their costs and harms on the whole patient population involved.

    Letters (even from powerful people) advocating one side or the other should be ignored other than as they may point to either evidence about clinical trials or research about the body. Simply adopting the viewpoint of a given letter like this is absolutely what a clinical treatment review must not do.

    Quality unfortunately of reviews varies significantly often from a careful and rational unbiased assessment of all evidence around.
     
    BurnA likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page