Search results

There are two conclusions one can form after reading Wessely's study the first is there is little difference between depression and CFS. The second is the questionnaire lacks relevance or specificity. Now if the questionnaire was designed by asking patients what is relevant and associated...

This brings home the point. By "normal" they meant within or above 1 SD of normal, which assuming a gaussian distribution would be the top 84% (68+16) of the population. Using the actual distribution in the graph above, this would mean a PF function cutoff somewhere around 82-84. Meaning they...

That isn't the only one they initially looked at though. So you have to correct for multiple comparisons and the odds go way down. When 90% (or whatever) of the general population has the SNP, at best it is clear the SNP is not the most important part. I don't know why the gene testing is...

Direct links will be tracked back to this thread.

To claim the wait period before a treatment is a "control" is laughable.

Or quality... Those professionals who think it is unimportant to critically read the method and results of a study, when you can just read the discussion and conclusion.

There is no magic cutoff, because it is a self report questionnaire with limited scope. In the real world, data like this is not clean. It's not just the potential for missing data but deliberate behaviour in answering the questionnaire in biased ways. It's quite possible to deliberately...

It's officially give awards to your mates season again!

The problem is there are hundreds if not thousands of possibilities that fit that criteria.

This is true, but I think the overall point remains - a Randomised Controlled (blinded comparison group) Trial is the minimum level of evidence and we need more evidence to determine the relevance. The classical examples are the use of antidepressants. We don't really know why they are...

I think Larun's argument is ridiculous because the patients who really don't like GET would never consent to participate in such a trial in the first place. Participants who are willing to participate in such a trial likely have "an open mind" if you know what I mean and even if they have...

Not to my satisfaction, no.

They still haven't bothered to ask patients with specific illnesses (and different backgrounds) whether these questions are understandable/easily answered and relevant.

I've had a lot of trouble trying to pin that down before...

The manuscript is decent but if you can't achieve significance with 49/48 patients, well, I doubt the therapy is very good.

See also: What is “evidence” in psychotherapies? Scott O. Lilienfeld https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20654?af=R

Despite all the rhetoric, rates of antivaxxers are not increasing and vaccination rates are at or near all time highs in almost all countries around the world. Those countries with lower vaccination rates have had severe vaccine shortages and other health system crises (Philippines, Ukraine -...

Sure, "pragmatic" trials can only ever be considered 'suggestive' quality evidence (along with case studies and pilot studies). The question is why do professionals assume that these trials can be considered 'moderately conclusive' quality evidence?

Most likely explanation is that it is a coincidence, with natural remission. I'd be very sceptical of anything less than a blinded pilot study.

There was substantial drop out rates, it is hard to say if this biased the results. I don't understand why they didn't include T2 results in Table 2? Why would you only publish half the results of a crossover trial? It suggests to me that something is not quite right. If physical activity...