Prevalence and predictors of recovery from chronic fatigue syndrome in a routine clinical practice

[Dolphin]

I totally agree about the problems with definition and study design - sorry I did not note that - to me it was a given that those were of great concern.

Ok, thanks.

Is there a move afoot to gather these questions and concerns and ask Chalder about them or is that a laughable idea?

The journal doesn't take letters to the editor. Perhaps somebody will post a critical comment on PubMed Commons when it goes up on PubMed. Trudie Chalder will have heard a lot of the criticisms already when they were made with regard to the PACE Trial which had many of the same flaws.

 

[Denise]

Ok, thanks.

No problem.

The journal doesn't take letters to the editor .

So one wonders if the policy of no letters to the editor influenced where to publish the article..... I certainly hope not.

And I hope that a critical comment (or 2 or 20) will be posted on PubMed Commons.

 

[Dr Speedy]

Chalder: 19% recovery from chronic fatigue with CBT, and 15% in CDC defined CFS, a placebo is MORE effective !!

"While 72.2% met the Oxford criteria for CFS at pre-treatment assessment, 53.1% did so at the 6-month follow-up (Pearson chi square = 19.5, df = 1, p < 0.001).

Likewise, chi-square revealed a significant reduction in prevalence from 52.6% of the participants meeting the CDC criteria at the pre-treatment assessment to 37.5% at the 6-month follow-up (Pearson chi square = 16.8, df = 1, p < 0.001).

my PS: Oxford criteria = chronic fatigue, not CFS or ME !!
CDC criteria = CFS, not ME !! *

So Chalder admits, CBT is useless !!

more @: http://niceguidelines.blogspot.com/2014/10/chalder-19-recovery-from-chronic.html

 

[Dolphin]

There's a thread on this here: http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...yndrome-in-a-routine-clinical-practice.32327/