1. Patients launch $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!
Join the National PR Campaign for ME: Power to the Patient (P2tP)
Have you had enough of all the neglect and abuse of ME/CFS patients? Gabby Klein says now is the time for a National PR Campaign for ME/CFS to impress a change. Join the Patient Revolution to restore power to ME patients ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

The pathway from glandular fever to CFS: can the CBT model provide the map?

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by oceanblue, Jul 30, 2010.

  1. oceanblue

    oceanblue Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,174
    Likes:
    343
    UK
    New research form the biopsychosocial fan club:

    The pathway from glandular fever to chronic fatigue syndrome: can the cognitive behavioural model provide the map?
    by: R. Moss Morris, M. J. Spence, R. Hou

    Psychological Medicine First View, 1-9. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S003329171000139X

    Apparently, developing CFS after glandular fever is down to patient attitudes:

    Abstract

    Background: The cognitive behavioural model of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) suggests that the illness is caused through reciprocal interactions between physiology, cognition, emotion and behaviour. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the psychological factors operationalized in this model could predict the onset of CFS following an acute episode of infectious mononucleosis commonly known as glandular fever (GF).

    Method: A total of 246 patients with GF were recruited into this prospective cohort study. Standardized self-report measures of perceived stress, perfectionism, somatization, mood, illness beliefs and behaviour were completed at the time of their acute illness. Follow-up questionnaires determined the incidence of new-onset chronic fatigue (CF) at 3 months and CFS at 6 months post-infection.

    Results: Of the participants, 9.4% met the criteria for CF at 3 months and 7.8% met the criteria for CFS at 6 months. Logistic regression revealed that factors proposed to predispose people to CFS including anxiety, depression, somatization and perfectionism were associated with new-onset CFS. Negative illness beliefs including perceiving GF to be a serious, distressing condition, that will last a long time and is uncontrollable, and responding to symptoms in an all-or-nothing behavioural pattern were also significant predictors. All-or-nothing behaviour was the most significant predictor of CFS at 6 months. Perceived stress and consistently limiting activity at the time of GF were not significantly associated with CFS.

    Conclusions: The findings from this study provide support for the cognitive behavioural model and a good basis for developing prevention and early intervention strategies for CFS.

    An interesting comparinson with the Dubbo Studies, which found that developing CFS was predicted by the severtity of the initial illness rather than psychological factors.

    "Enjoy"
     
  2. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes:
    5,879
    It would be interesting to see if they did measure severity of initial onset too.

    You'd have thought the the severity of initial illness would be strongly correlate with "perceiving GF to be a serious, distressing condition, that will last a long time and is uncontrollable".


    I wonder if they've ever done a study to see what affect promoting the notion that CFS patients are emotionally abnormal somatizers has upon patients? I find it rather stressful trying to stay clear headed while questioning my own sanity. Surely it adds something of a strain to our lives?

    I've left this post a bit confused and stream of consciousness as I think it rather illustrates the effect that these kind of studies can have on a fragile mind. I really wonder if anyone's bothered to see how this sort of work affects CFS patients. I can't imagine they care.

    ps: I think the idea of studying glandular fever patients at initial onset and then trying to understand what risk factors may lead on to CFS is a more sensible way of doing things though. It could be that the full paper for this has some worthwhile data.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2014
  3. Sean

    Sean Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,306
    Likes:
    2,330
    Bingo!

    I will bet there is a bunch of psych literature that looks at what happens to people when you put them under that kind of scrutiny, when their basic sanity is questioned, especially when it is done without much justification and in devious subjective double-bind ways, by so called experts with very serious authority over the subjects. I will also bet the results are not pretty for the ones on the receiving end, independent of their psycho-social-economic-physical status beforehand. And if you are already actually seriously physically ill, the results of that corrosive doubt would be even more devastating.
     
    Roy S likes this.
  4. oceanblue

    oceanblue Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,174
    Likes:
    343
    UK
    That's a very pertinent point. I might not be able to get hold of this paper before next week but will look more closely (and I agree that this type of study using GF as a model for CFS is potentially a good approach).

    Certainly all these strident 'it's all down to patient's psychological problems' papers create a lot of stress, particularly as we then need to understand the papers to see if it's a real finding or just more self-deluded, second-rate science.

    It would probably drive me to alcohol abuse if the illness hadn't made me alcohol intolerant.
     
    overtrain likes this.
  5. judderwocky

    judderwocky Senior Member

    Messages:
    327
    Likes:
    3
    LOL...

    These guys are such IDIOTS.

    Many of the disorders they are studying... like OCD are now known to be IMMUNE DISORDERS.

    They refuse to admit that by studying a group of mentally ill people they are already studying an immune disorder.

    They can CURE mice of OCD by giving them a bone marrow translpant and changing their immune profile.

    The disorder disappears completely within 3 weeks.

    So even if there is a connection to mental disorders... it doesn't even mean that the mental behavior precipitated the illness as they are suggesting.

    ONCE AGAIN. Psychology is FAIL SCIENCE. ITS NOT REAL.

    CBT is just an attempt to abridge this problem. In a scientific "looking" way.

    Real scientists take measurements. THey don't sit around talk and interpret the feelings of bosons when they are around neutrinos. They don't ask electrons why they changed their mind. They measure protein and cell counts. You can't "count" emotions. It doesn't make any hermeneutical sense and a huge chunk of the post-modern philosophical movement, the modern scientific movement, and even ancient materialist philosophies and Buddhist religions would agree with me that emotions become open to interpretation. Trying to quantify this is about as effective as counting sunspots with the naked eye.

    Oh and I get they think they have established research tools and models that get them around this. They're just silly mind games... the same kind people would use to prove that the world sat on the back of a turtle, or to prove the existence of fairies. They fit their particular, vaguely humanist conception of cosmology, and the entire personality and life history of the individual are appropriated into it through a series of overly simplistic rituals designed to make the psychologist look as though he has given and or developed insight in the patient.

    The only people that are in denial about CBT are the psychologists. There are entire branches of psycholinguists and psychoanalysts and psychologists that are launching these criticisms against psychology themselves! Even they know it! The sad thing is, even their own acknowledge this!

    And like most religions, they don't want to actually admit they are a religion. They just keep reiterating their belief that they are right.

    Its modern mysticism... which is just Greek mysticism... repackaged for a humanist lifestyle. at best.

    **COUGH*** CULT ***COUGH****
     
    leela likes this.
  6. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    I wonder could one say that measuring emotions is a bit like that problem from science (can't remember exact name and details) where can't know the position and velocity of an electron simultaneously (as the act of measuring alters it).
     
  7. Sean

    Sean Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,306
    Likes:
    2,330
  8. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    Here is the CBT model for the illness which they present in the introduction:

     
  9. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    I find their definition of somatisation symptoms questionable:
    Given how closely orthostatic symptoms are associated with CFS, it seems symptoms such as racing heart and dizziness shouldn't be seen as evidence of somatisation. Similarly loss of strength.
     
  10. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    CFS is defined using either the Fukuda definition or the Oxford (Sharpe et al., 1991) definition:
    The Oxford criteria basically only require fatigue. It would be interesting to know if the results would be different if they used a different definition (incl. Fukuda only) - maybe some of what they are picking up are people who have developed depression?
     
  11. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes:
    5,879
    That sounds like a fairly respectable and clear model (although not one that seems to tie terribly well to reality). I'm surprised they were willing to be so honest about it and make claims that allow us to make fairly strong predictions:

    "Predisposed people are thought to be high on perfectionism and prone to distress, basing their self-esteem and the respect from others on their abilities to live up to certain high standards."

    Did their study mention how many people developed CFS who fulfilled none of these critieria? If there were any, surely that would be a fairly significant blow to the CBT model, and would prevent them from concluding in support of the CBT model.

    Something that worries me is that they could just have described the characteristics of those people who are likely to place themselves under greater strain than is normal, and that could increase susceptibility to all manner of illnesses. How clear cut is the association between these traits and CFS? If you don't have HIV, you don't have AIDS. If you don't have any of these traits, can you still have CFS? Are these traits associated will an illness like cancer?

    I've not read the paper, but from what I have read of papers similar I'm afraid that I cannot expect much from it.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2013
  12. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
  13. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    Behavioural Responses to Illness Questionnaire (BRIQ) questions

    Behavioural Responses to Illness Questionnaire (BRIQ):
    All questions etc at:
    http://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz...2/5225/101017S0033291704003484.pdf?sequence=1

    This is from the Methods section of the glandular fever paper:
    Glandular Fever=infectious mononucleosis (mono)
     
  14. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    I'm not sure I have the time to think this through but I'm wondering what they really showed in this study.

    All-or-nothing was all one is left with after multivariate logistic regression (if it is above 0.05 it is not considered statistically significant although they don't make this clear in the text):

    These seem like the sort of things people with CFS might do in the early days when they don't know too much about it and still could have lots of responsibilities (job, demanding course, children, etc.).

    ETA: what I'm trying to say is that people with post-exertional malaise might have satisfy the criteria above, but people who were just fatigued might not i.e. they found that people who had "CFS" at 6 months were more likely to have the CFS symptom of post-exertional malaise/payback at the start.

    Also, some people might say the opposite of the CBT model, is the listening-to-your-body and pacing yourself model. I'm not sure this has been disproved in this study.
     
    Cheshire likes this.
  15. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes:
    5,879
    "I have carried on with things as normal until my body can not cope any longer"

    Hold on.... my doctor told me to try to carry on with things as normal!!

    That's not a sign of an 'all or nothing' mentality, it's a reflection of the widespread belief amongst the medical community that fatigue is the result of an acceptance of sickness behaviors and requires the patient to make the effort to return to health and the fact that many patients are stupid enough to trust them (myself included).

    ps: Thanks for providing these exerts.
     
  16. oceanblue

    oceanblue Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,174
    Likes:
    343
    UK
    Good point. And I wonder if they had properly validated that all-or-nothing scale?

    But even if the finding were true, the raw BRIQ All-or-nothing measure (not the Factor they then created) had an Odds Ratio (OR) of 1.14 for CFS. If I understand things right, that is a tiny effect - especially at they had only 17 'CFS' cases to go on. The authors cite a separate study looking at All-or-nothing attitudes in a similar prospective study of IBS, quoting and OR of 1.09, which again looks small.

    Now, if I calculated this right - and I admit am way out of my depth - this study shows an OR of 8:1 for the effect of being female on developing CFS. [16/17 CFS cases female, 126/217 non-cases female]. But if that is vaguely right it suggests that a demographic factor is far more important than any attitude in predicting CFS. However, I may be a non-mathematician going under here...
     
  17. judderwocky

    judderwocky Senior Member

    Messages:
    327
    Likes:
    3
    No. I understand why you are saying that, but they are nothing alike.

    The heisenberg uncertainty principle is a derivable, provable, mathematical fact. Its more like a defined ratio between certain mathematical variables within quantum.

    There is nothing "defined" about emotions. There is nothing in inerently mathematical in their definition or relation to one another. Different cultures call emotions different things, and have often times, different names for different "colors" of emotions.

    How many different words for love are there in Greek? There is no way to quantify the meaning or relationships of these "categories" of emotions.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

    contains a list of several ways to derive the formula...

    its kind of difficult to explain without the experiments, but it is a physical and measurable phenomena.
     
  18. oceanblue

    oceanblue Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,174
    Likes:
    343
    UK
    Great point. Actually I've had a relapse following the exact same advice from a full-blown psychiatrist no less, a CFS specialist, who thought listening to your body was a very bad thing indeed.
     
  19. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    I suppose I should have made clearer that I wasn't summarising what you were saying, just making a point that questionnaires are an indirect way of measuring emotions and the act of filling in a questionnaire might not translate to a state that is being reported. The wiki page for the uncertainty principle looks quite complicated and I think I'll give it a miss. I only got as far as Newtonian physics/mathematical modelling.

    But like you say, there can be other problems with the idea of emotions.

    Analogies with the physical world are rarely accurate e.g. momentum in the physical world has a very specific meaning and follows certain laws. But in lay speech, one might say something has momentum e.g. a candidate's election campaign has momentum, but it doesn't necessarily follow any of the same laws. Analogies are using inaccurate - with momentum, it can take a lot to stop something with a lot of mass which has some velocity but things in the non-physical world which have "momentum" could come to a stop with something small, etc.
     
  20. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,868
    Likes:
    6,148
    Table 4 (Table 4. Multivariate logistic regression analyses of the psychological factor scores on CF/CFS outcome at 3 and 6 months fol lowing GF) might be more useful to look at.

    The odds ratio for gender (for CFS at 6 months) is 6.46 (95% C.I. 0.77-54.10) p=0.09.
    For All-or-nothing behaviour it's 1.92 (1.07-3.39) p=0.03*

    What they say, that gender isn't an issue, seems to me to be debatable. It looks numerically that it is likely to be a big factor (female gender increases risk a lot) but they don't have a big enough sample to be sure. While they can be more sure All-or-nothing behaviour is a factor but it's not as big a factor (odds ratio is lower so less than double the risk).
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page