PACE Trial and PACE Trial Protocol

B

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Location
England (south coast)
Last edited:
D

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
I've only skimmed this but looks like Mr Matthees is making interesting points. This is from an e-mail alert I set up for the request.
Subject: Your WhatDoTheyKnow email alert


New updates for the request 'Selected data on PACE Trial participants'

======================================================================


Mr Matthees added an annotation (15 December 2014)

"QMUL have refused this request but I want to post an update for

the record. I still maintain that QMUL have failed to provide

convincing reasons why..."

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/selected_data_on_pace_trial_part#comment-55843


Mr Matthees added an annotation (15 December 2014)

"A few more links that others may find useful: The European

Medicines Agency (http://www.ema.europa.eu) are now backing public

access to clinical tria..."

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/selected_data_on_pace_trial_part#comment-55844
Click to expand...
 
D

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
Another PACE Trial paper has been published.

There's a thread on the paper here:
Rehabilitative therapies for chronic fatigue syndrome: a secondary mediation analysis of PACE trial
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...ndary-mediation-analysis-of-pace-trial.34927/

There's a thread on the media coverage, etc. on it here:
New PACE paper, more SMC spin.
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/new-pace-paper-more-smc-spin.34924/

A commentary was published alongside it. There's a thread on it here:
"What makes a difference in chronic fatigue syndrome?": Commentary on PACE Trial mediators paper
http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...mmentary-on-pace-trial-mediators-paper.34928/

 
D

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
From the latest mediators paper:

What fun: another mediation paper to look forward to.
Finally, in this analysis we focused on single mediators and the effects of some of these variables are not likely to be independent. Our forthcoming analysis of multiple mediator effects will provide more information on this issue.
Click to expand...
 
D

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
Here's a file with all the questionnaires that were used in the PACE Trial. It can be easier to get on top of things with it I think. Also it's a useful source for questionnaires that are used in various other ME/CFS papers:
http://www.megafileupload.com/en/file/599406/PACE-Trial-Protocol-searchable-pdf.html

It may have been uploaded before but no harm posting it again I think.

[I can't upload it to PR - at 13.34 MB it is said to be too big]
 
A

Aurator

Senior Member
Messages
625
It's a small matter perhaps, and others are bound to know better than I do, but can anyone say whether the quantity of likes obtained by each respondent on the rapid responses page will have a direct influence on which responses get selected for the print publication, and whether the number of likes each response has received will actually be indicated in the print publication?

My only thought is that if readers of the print version are unable to see how many people favoured or did not favour certain responses it will deny them valuable insight into the relative levels of support (by experts and non-experts alike) for the different views expressed.
 
T

Tom Kindlon

Senior Member
Messages
1,734
Aurator said:
It's a small matter perhaps, and others are bound to know better than I do, but can anyone say whether the quantity of likes obtained by each respondent on the rapid responses page will have a direct influence on which responses get selected for the print publication, and whether the number of likes each response has received will actually be indicated in the print publication?

My only thought is that if readers of the print version are unable to see how many people favoured or did not favour certain responses it will deny them valuable insight into the relative levels of support (by experts and non-experts alike) for the different views expressed.
Click to expand...
The likes don't show up in the print edition.

BMJ letters have an unofficial word limit of 250-300. Sometimes the editors might try to edit down a letter a bit. But I can't see them doing it with Carloyn's letter or my own. I doubt the like count has much if any bearing on what is selected to be printed.
 
A

Aurator

Senior Member
Messages
625
Tom Kindlon said:
I doubt the like count has much if any bearing on what is selected to be printed.
Click to expand...
That's as I suspected.
Sean said:
And neither should it. It is not a popularity contest.
Click to expand...
In an ideal world it shouldn't be. If I wasn't aware how unjustifiably popular biopsychosocial theories about ME are in the NHS, the DWP, and central government, I too wouldn't hesitate to say that the wider popularity of what gets printed about ME in the BMJ should count for nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back