Search results

Conclusion: They have not provided any proof that there is any damage to the ANS. That seems to be a lot of wishful thinking. All they have are correlations.

That sounds very high.

One of the worst concepts in medical and psychological research is «risk factor». It’s usually used do describe correlating factors, but it heavily implies a one-directional causal relationship. It is borderline doublespeak and is frequently used as a not so subtle dogwhistle for psychopathology.

@dave30th is this something worth writing to the editor about? The assessment of the quality of the evidence (i.e. risk of bias) is atrocious. Every trial should have been rated as high risk or bias, rendering the subsequent analyses redundant. The conclusion should have been «there is no...

The good old trick of inferring one-way causality from correlation. Good luck treating RA with CBT..

All studies were rated as «low risk of bias» in the category «risk of bias in measurement of outcome». This category includes these questions: 4.1 Was the method of measuring the outcome inappropriate? 4.2 Could measurement or ascertainment of the outcome have differed between intervention...

From the conclusion: Meaning that they’ve not understood a single thing about how correlation doesn’t imply causation.

It might be that for research, using the DecodeME approach to identifying patients might be sufficient for recruitment, and that using FUNCAP + objective measurements (steps, body position, etc.) is sufficient for outcomes. It’s not perfect, but we’d have a hard time justifying why anything...

I feel like FUNCAP does the second one as well as one could realistically hope. You might even be able to modify it to ask people about today and not a middle day the past month to try to get a glimpse into what a PEM episode looks like.

I’m not sure that’s what they did. I think they looked a longitudinal symptom data for infected and uninfected with persistent symptoms, and then looked at the symptoma clustering and found that the uninfected didn’t have a cluster with the combination of memory impairment and fatigue, but the...

This reads like someone trying to find data that corroborates their pet theory instead of trying to falsify it. From limitations: Ah, so the purpose of future research is to validate the hypothesis, and not to check if it’s actually true?

I do not understand the purpose of this. It feels like an a la carte menu that the patients are supposed to order from. I imagine the secondary gains proponents will have a field day with this. And how do they expect a GP to react if a patients brings this questionnaire to them? It also...

I suspect you will have to be living under a rock to not get to know there is a treatment before it gets approved for general use. I suspect the more difficult issue will be to get people diagnosed correctly if the treatment doesn’t also include the discovery of a biomarker.

19 is this: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9210800/ It’s a shame they include references to so speculative claims.

I think this is the correct link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225276822_Why_Do_We_Always_End_Up_Here_Evidence-Based_Medicine's_Conceptual_Cul-De-Sacs_and_Some_Off-Road_Alternative_Routes

It’s not possible to say anything about the prevalence of symptoms following covid infections, other than that it does occur and that covid-infections are not harmless for children. These children have it tough enough already with the war..

Thanks, I’ve edited to clarify. Yes, these are problems but I don’t think they are best solved by psychologists. I’d much rather have a skilled nurse do that, maybe with an OT as well. Because they can answer medical questions as well. We don’t need all of the extra bits from the psychologists.

My psychologist is brilliant, mostly because she doesn’t really use any frameworks (other than something that basically amounts to «it might help talking about it»), and everything else is «this is one way to look a things, does that resonate with you», with me responding «not really, this is...

Sara Meddings: How would a psychologist be able to help pwME/CFS to continue working? And why would they be involved in pacing? This seems like exactly the kind of scope creep that we do not want.