Someone has pointed out to me that, in the protocol, 'pragmatic rehabilitation' is described using the following phrases:
"[CFS is] often maintained by illness beliefs that lead to exercise avoidance."
"The essential feature of the treatment is the provision of a detailed explanation for patients' symptoms, couched in terms of the physiological dysregulation model, from which flows the rationale for a graded return to activity."
"The explanations for various symptoms of CFS/ME highlight the interaction between psychological and biological factors."
"Having taken control of their symptoms through a programme of graded activity, normalisation of sleep patterns, and simple anxiety and stress-reducing procedures, patients are better able to consider the role of psychological and social factors in their condition."
So I think this pretty much makes it clear that they are trying to correct 'maladaptive cognition', etc. In which case it suggests the use of 'CBT', because 'GET' is designed only to increase exertion, and not to address maladaptive cognition.
So I think that answers the question, and I can safely say that elements of CBT were used, or similar.
The above passages were a description of 'pragmatic rehabilitation' specifically in reference to the Liverpool study, which some of the FINE Trial authors also authored.
But the FINE Trial does not indicate that the version of 'pragmatic rehabilitation' used was any different to the Liverpool study. Immediately after the Liverpool 'pragmatic rehabilitation' description, the FINE protocol just says the following, suggesting that there was no change in protocol:
"The treatment trial protocol reported here was designed to determine whether pragmatic rehabilitation is effective in
primary care settings, when delivered by non-specialist nursing staff who have received brief training."