Fred Springfield's post to co-cure of Dec/9/09
I guess I'm being a bit silly. I read the title of this research and I started to get angry. Then I saw that while the title says "unexplained chronic fatigue". for the test group "Chronic fatigue was assessed with a self-report questionnaire (both self-rated and clinically-rated) in a primary care Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) group", and "compared with two other clinical populations (minor medical condition: N = 51; chronic organic disease: N = 52)."
So now I'm furious. How does anyone get away with calling this science, let alone getting it published? As I understand it, with just the title and the method, the authors have said that CFS is unexplained chronic fatigue and is not a chronic organic disease. This contravenes the science.
By heart goes out to all who live in Belgium.
I have to confess that after that, I thought I didn't have the stomach (or the brain today) to read the study in full. But then realized I should try to in order to see if they provided any rationale whatsoever for how they jumped to their final conclusion. Of the 2 sites I found with the article, Unbound med says this is the full text, but Researchgate wouldn't show a full article without a subscription.
I guess a silver-lining is that when their research is based on patently false premises, it is easy to dismiss it.
(my bolds and comments between quotes)
ME/CFS IS a chronic organic disease.
surprise!
Had they said "compared to patients with OTHER chronic organic diseases, this would seem surprisingly accurate - people with ME/CFS have more fatigue-related disability than people with other chronic organic diseases and the same level of interpersonal problems..
Is "somewhat" a scientific term?
We need the full text here to know what they are talking about. What does this mean? Differ in what way?
ok - people who have higher fatigue levels are more withdrawn from social interaction ie - they are not physically capable of as much.
But are the authors also trying to imply that if a doctor rates a patient's fatigue problems at a different level than the patient does him/herself that there is more withdrawal from social interaction than if they both had the same rating, whether high or low? That's the only way I could see that they could even have a wobbly leg to stand on
How would they make such a jump? Because a patient feels that their doctor does not understand them, or is that the disease that they have, the patient would withdraw from social interactions?????
The only cause and correlation that I've seen them show is that the more severe the fatigue, the fewer social interactions.
ARGGGHHH
I guess I'm being a bit silly. I read the title of this research and I started to get angry. Then I saw that while the title says "unexplained chronic fatigue". for the test group "Chronic fatigue was assessed with a self-report questionnaire (both self-rated and clinically-rated) in a primary care Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) group", and "compared with two other clinical populations (minor medical condition: N = 51; chronic organic disease: N = 52)."
So now I'm furious. How does anyone get away with calling this science, let alone getting it published? As I understand it, with just the title and the method, the authors have said that CFS is unexplained chronic fatigue and is not a chronic organic disease. This contravenes the science.
By heart goes out to all who live in Belgium.
I have to confess that after that, I thought I didn't have the stomach (or the brain today) to read the study in full. But then realized I should try to in order to see if they provided any rationale whatsoever for how they jumped to their final conclusion. Of the 2 sites I found with the article, Unbound med says this is the full text, but Researchgate wouldn't show a full article without a subscription.
I guess a silver-lining is that when their research is based on patently false premises, it is easy to dismiss it.
(my bolds and comments between quotes)
Unexplained chronic fatigue and interpersonal problems: a study in a primary care population
Journal: Int J Psychiatry Med. 2009;39(3):325-40.
Authors: Vandenbergen J, Vanheule S, Desmet M, Verhaeghe P.
Affiliation: Ghent University, Belgium.
NLM Citation: PMID: 19967903
OBJECTIVE: Unexplained fatigue syndromes are multidimensional phenomena that involve a constellation of symptoms. This article explores whether typical interpersonal problems are associated with self-reported and clinically-rated fatigue symptoms in chronically fatigued patients. We hypothesize that the severity of fatigue symptoms will be associated with a pattern of withdrawal from social interaction.
METHOD: Interpersonal problems were assessed by means of a self-report questionnaire. Chronic fatigue was assessed with a self-report questionnaire (both self-rated and clinically-rated) in a primary care Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) group (N = 52) and compared with two other clinical populations (minor medical condition: N = 51; chronic organic disease: N = 52).
ME/CFS IS a chronic organic disease.
RESULTS: Compared to patients with a minor medical condition, CFS patients are substantially more fatigued and more socially withdrawn.
surprise!
Compared to patients with a chronic organic disease, somewhat more fatigue-related disability was observed in CFS patients, but no distinct interpersonal problems came to the fore.
Had they said "compared to patients with OTHER chronic organic diseases, this would seem surprisingly accurate - people with ME/CFS have more fatigue-related disability than people with other chronic organic diseases and the same level of interpersonal problems..
Is "somewhat" a scientific term?
CFS patients and physicians proved to differ in their opinion on the patient's motivation.
We need the full text here to know what they are talking about. What does this mean? Differ in what way?
In line with the hypothesis, self-rated and clinically-scored fatigue problems proved to be related to a pattern of withdrawal from social interaction.
ok - people who have higher fatigue levels are more withdrawn from social interaction ie - they are not physically capable of as much.
But are the authors also trying to imply that if a doctor rates a patient's fatigue problems at a different level than the patient does him/herself that there is more withdrawal from social interaction than if they both had the same rating, whether high or low? That's the only way I could see that they could even have a wobbly leg to stand on
CONCLUSION: Differences between physicians' and patients in how symptoms are interpreted might be related to patients feeling misunderstood and result in social withdrawal.
How would they make such a jump? Because a patient feels that their doctor does not understand them, or is that the disease that they have, the patient would withdraw from social interactions?????
The only cause and correlation that I've seen them show is that the more severe the fatigue, the fewer social interactions.
ARGGGHHH