Search results

Yet I think it could be extremely helpful to have all of David Tuller's ( @dave30th ) criticism, also regarding MUS, on pubpeer, too. Could be also better searchable than Virology blog and S4ME. https://pubpeer.com/static/about Since there are sometimes people asking for easy volunteer work...

(Continued from my previous post.) So what I basically wanted to say or ask is: 1. It's good that you're here. I see that the language we use regarding blinding and subjective and (potential) objective outcomes/ endpoints etc. could be more precise to avoid misunderstandings. From the forum...

Hi Hilda, I don't know whether I will be able to reply to some of your and others valuable posts within reasonable time, but I'd like to let some non-substantial thoughts here. I wrote this over the last days, so apologies if some points are now redundant. To facilitate reading, I will post...

There is also the worrying role the Sciene Media Centre (UK) played in presenting the Lightning Process trial (SMILE): https://www.virology.ws/2017/12/18/trial-by-error-my-questions-for-the-science-media-centre/ What I don't recall now is whether the trial investigators reported how school...

Participants of this study were recruited as part of an ongoing RCT: Twomey R, Martin T, Temesi J, Culos-Reed SN, Millet GY. Tailored exercise interventions to reduce fatigue in cancer survivors: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer. 2018 Jul 24;18(1):757. doi...

Just realized that we don't have a subforum on trial methdology, so I hope it's OK to leave this here: Looking around what diverse experts say on the need for objective outcomes in open-label trials I repeatedly came across the Centre for Evidence Based Medicne (CEBM) at the University of...

Another example: https://twitter.com/SnowyPanthera/status/1222476712203575297 I realize that this is a difficult field especially with regard to objective measures in mental illness, and I admit I can't remember how the argument that certain trials were not 'unblinded' but 'assessor-blinded'...

I missed that. What do you mean by a valid example, @Medfeb ? Do you mean that investigating pain as an outcome in an unblinded, not adequately controlled trial with self-reported pain relief as the only measure is valid? I found these statements by @Hilda Bastian: I am not sure what you...

I'm still only able to occasionally read and post, so again apologies for missing most of the discussion when replying to a particular post. Yes, having objective outcomes that are only self-reported is also problematic. I think there mostly exist some ways to reduce the risk that objective...

Did anybody actually say this? I think it's clear for all of us that including relevant subjective endpoints is always highly valuable, also in unblinded trials, but the point some of us repeatedly are trying to make is that if you, in unblinded trials, don't at the same time, in addition to...

Still not able to catch up with this and related threads, so again apologies for just jumping in. Perhaps an open letter signed (only) by psychologists and psychiatrists could help debunk the argument that all criticism that a certain branch of psychologically informed research on ME receives...

Hi @Hilda Bastian, thank you for your replies and for joing the forum as a guest. Haven't caught up with this thread yet, so apologies for just popping in. I still don't understand why all the well-founded criticism of the exercise review is not reasons enough to retract it, at least...

Edzard Ernst replies to one of his LP blog article's commenter: https://edzardernst.com/2020/06/the-lightning-process-implausible-unproven-hyped-and-expensive/#comment-123663 Just spotted the abstract of the Cochrane exercise review among those links --- which, when retrieved on the PubMed...

Very good letters. Big thanks to the letter writers Professor Jonathan Edwards and DrPH David Tuller. Also big thanks to those sharing David's blog post on Twitter. https://twitter.com/MECFSNews/status/1266959227987415040 https://twitter.com/StenHelmfrid/status/1267008515408834562

The BMJ Paediatrics Open has now published it, too: https://bmjpaedsopen.bmj.com/content/4/1/e000620.responses Thank you @Michiel Tack for another brilliant piece. It also got a nice title on David's blog post. There's rhythm in it...

Two of the authors (Sharpe & White) are on the journal's editorial board: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/journal-of-psychosomatic-research/about/editorial-board

So the biggest group (38%) showed an "indeterminate pattern". Couldn't they have done something useful with accelerometer data, e.g. if they had let particpants wear the devices at some time points during and after treatment? Or if they at least had included PEM as a hypothesis in their...

Not an answer but maybe a hint: From this thread: https://www.s4me.info/threads/michael-sharpe-mind-medicine-and-morals-a-tale-of-two-illnesses-2019-bmj-blog-and-published-responses.9729/page-16#post-241133 :

Did you check your spam filter? ;-) How about: ask i f they received the letter, attach the letter again and give them 48h(*) to tell you whether they will publish it, before you'll publish it on Virology Blog? see also re: Jonathan's letter: Anyway, did you see how the Dagbladet puts...

Voilà -- the Larun/ Wyller/ Malterud/ Stubhaug piece: https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/debatt/i/B3wbQ/baade-kropp-og-sjel https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aftenposten.no%2Fmeninger%2Fdebatt%2Fi%2FB3wbQ%2Fbaade-kropp-og-sjel