6&7 Nov: Cochrane wants patients' views in tweetchat to make 2018 conference relevant, accessible

First tweet chat is: Monday 6th November at 14:00 GMT

I know I've had a couple of twitter accounts, but I keep forgetting the passwords for them so might try to borrow my partner's (assuming I my brain is in gear for this). I hate how short tweets are tbh. It makes it much harder to be critical without seeming rude and aggressive.

Maybe it would be good to link to this Coyne blog? https://jcoynester.wordpress.com/20...iew-of-exercise-for-chronic-fatigue-syndrome/
 
I've never really understood the Cochrane review, even before I was ill and didn't follow science. It seems fairly obvious that if you gather up a load of accepted publications you are either collecting up a set of biases or a set of truths.

Just being the collector is not sufficient to declare which one you have done.

Example:

Its 1976 and Jimmy Saville is constantly in the newspapers covering what a decent and upstanding charity fundraiser he is.

Get all the cut outs, put them on a table.

Job done, that's the truth.
 
Thanks Paul and others. Looks like only a few people were able/remembered to take part, but still that concerns about their ME work dominated the discussion.

For the rest of us, we've got another session tomorrow: Tuesday 7th November at 20:00 GMT.

 
I have no idea if this is appropriate here, or not, but one thing that puzzles me with these sort of treatment assessments is why they don;t use standard measures. For instance, why are treatments that get, say, less than a 30% approval rating from their recipients still funded, let alone pushed. Any treatment that the vast majority of recipients consider ineffective, or harmful, should at least be looked at from that perspective, not just on the basis of papers.

We are, after all, who they are supposed to be doing this for - the medics, the NHS, the shrinks - if we say it's garbage, why aren't we listened to?
 
The main results from Cochrane 2017 state that 5 of the 8 RCT studies they used for the review, used the Oxford Criteria to diagnose CFS.( Their term for ME not mine). This is on P2 of their report.

The results from the US IOM report, Feb 2015, stated that the Oxford criteria should be retired.

The online BMJ Best Practice report for "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome" states on P4 under "Definition", "Exercise and cognitive behavioural therapy studies that used the Oxford criteria for study inclusion are biased and misleading because people with true CFs are underrepresented,"

There are other useful quotes from this document,
 
The pages of the Cochrane report which have the comments from Tom Kindlon and Robert Courtney and poss others are 113-133. NB These are the report P nos, I think I started printing at 117.
There will be salient points in these as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom