http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ya-oQep9QR8J:results.ref.ac.uk/(S(1x5usno2sjtyyfwoj2a5u0g5))/DownloadFile/ImpactCaseStudy/pdf?caseStudyId=18135 &cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk Nothing that important. I pulled out about 25% of it for people who only want a taster, but it's not that long. Why the contorted 'recovered their health' rather than 'recovered'? Anyone want to guess? The phrasing is repeated later too. The P2P Evidence Review was critical of the PACE trial's recovery paper, and this commentary pointed out a number of problems with it too: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11136-014-0819-0 Maybe people are starting to see through the BS. Funny to have them acting like BACME's support is impressive. Ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho.