PACE Trial and PACE Trial Protocol
- Thread starter Dolphin
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,051
- Likes
- 10,097
Unless it's "fast tracked".
Unless it's "fast tracked".
I can't remember I'm afraid. Possible the recent foreign language article that quoted from Sharpe and one of the re-analysis statisticians? If not that, something similar. It was just a sentence on them planning to publish in a journal, with no further details on it.
- Messages
- 1,700
- Likes
- 8,927
She doesn't mention whether this is in connection with the PACE trial so on the law of averages it probably isn't but thought I would post it somewhere. Given that the usual model for CBT is basically that you should be able to get yourself better by changing one's supposed maladaptive beliefs and behaviours, one could see how it would have this effect.
Given that the usual model for CBT is basically that you should be able to get yourself better by changing one's supposed maladaptive beliefs and behaviours, one could see how it would have this effect.
Would it be worth trying to convince this guy that the PACE trial is the epitome of bad science, both because of its methodology and its harmful consequences for patients ?
John Arnold Made a Fortune at Enron. Now He’s Declared War on Bad Science
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/john-arnold-waging-war-on-bad-science
John Arnold Made a Fortune at Enron. Now He’s Declared War on Bad Science
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/john-arnold-waging-war-on-bad-science
- Messages
- 5,256
- Likes
- 32,032
Yes, I suspect the involvement of Goldacre is by the way. It might be worth trying to connect to Arnold.
Table 4 gives data on the numbers and percentages of patients in the PACE Trial who have the following. I'm not sure if we were given this data before.
All depressive disorders
Major depressive disorder
Minor depressive disorder
Dysthymic disorder
All anxiety disorders
Generalised anxiety disorder
Fibromyalgia
Interestingly, scrolling down to "discussion", 123 patients were morbidly obese. That could affect our comments about walking distances (although, of course, not the lack of difference between the groups).
In table B at the bottom, it would be interesting to know which was centre F, the one with so many more NSAEs.
I'm too muddle-headed at the moment to work out the relevance, but I notice that, overall, the results in table 4 for those meeting ME criteria, or the "all psychiatric" have roughly equal percentages in the ≤4 and the >4 columns for those who met the criteria as for those who did not. But when you get down to specific psychological criteria, such as minor depressive, the difference is much greater between those who have it and those who do not (9/91 and 12/88).
In table B at the bottom, it would be interesting to know which was centre F, the one with so many more NSAEs.
I'm too muddle-headed at the moment to work out the relevance, but I notice that, overall, the results in table 4 for those meeting ME criteria, or the "all psychiatric" have roughly equal percentages in the ≤4 and the >4 columns for those who met the criteria as for those who did not. But when you get down to specific psychological criteria, such as minor depressive, the difference is much greater between those who have it and those who do not (9/91 and 12/88).