1. Guest, read our 'News in Brief' post for w/c 13th Jan by clicking here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Show your support for the proposed GWAS research, for details click here.
    Dismiss Notice

A general thread on the PACE trial!

Discussion in 'PsychoSocial ME/CFS Research' started by Esther12, Nov 7, 2017.

  1. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,520
    Likes Received:
    25,788
    Location:
    Norway
  2. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,520
    Likes Received:
    25,788
    Location:
    Norway
  3. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,520
    Likes Received:
    25,788
    Location:
    Norway
     
    EzzieD, Woolie, Inara and 3 others like this.
  4. Indigophoton

    Indigophoton Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    9,732
    Location:
    UK
  5. MSEsperanza

    MSEsperanza Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    6,922
    Location:
    betwixt and between
    Today's PACE-Trial-For-Beginners-Quiz

    So, I skimmed the Cochrane thread, bookmarked some threads in Woolie's wonderful library, digged into this fabulous general thread on the PACE trial, and ended up with two surprise questions for today:

    1) What does the acronym "PACE" stand for?

    2) Why is the PACE trial called a "controlled" trial when in fact it had no control group but was a merely comparative trial?
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2018
    Inara, Skycloud, MeSci and 1 other person like this.
  6. Woolie

    Woolie Committee member

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    14,298
    Its very contrived:

    Pacing, graded Activity, and Cognitive behaviour therapy: a randomised Evaluation (PACE)

    I know, right?

    PACE had a "control group", but the trial can't technically be called controlled, because that implies everything was identical in the control and active conditions except for the active ingredient. Since the "control" condition received less face time, that's incorrect. Arguably, other things, such as patients' expectations, were also not equivalent across trial arms.
     
    Inara, Skycloud, Indigophoton and 7 others like this.
  7. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,862
    Likes Received:
    32,783
    Location:
    UK
    It's also very misleading; as Pacing is APT (developed specifically for the trial), Graded activity is GET, and Cognitive behaviour therapy is also a 'special version' developed for CFS.

    So right from the title the deceit/manipulation began....
     
    Inara, Hutan, Indigophoton and 9 others like this.
  8. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    8,570
    I have said elsewhere that using technical definitions of things that are vastly different from the usual then rarely clarifying is their modus operandi.
     
    Inara, Hutan, MeSci and 6 others like this.
  9. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,286
    Likes Received:
    15,197
    It would be interesting to know who it was that came up with the name PACE. Was it a committee decision, or did someone present thee idea to them? It is so Orwellian that it would be useful to know.
     
    Inara, Hutan, Esther12 and 5 others like this.
  10. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    8,570
    PACE, SMILE, FINE, do you see a pattern? They always do this.
     
    Inara, Esther12, MeSci and 6 others like this.
  11. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,286
    Likes Received:
    15,197
    Yes, I get that, but it seems a little naïve and amateurish to be so blatant about it.
     
    Inara, Woolie, MSEsperanza and 2 others like this.
  12. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,073
    Likes Received:
    61,543
    The original PACE paper does not call it a controlled trial I think. Cochrane included it in their analysis of controlled trials. It has been pointed out to them that this is no good. We will wait to see what happens next.

    As I understand it the name PACE was used specifically to please patient charities who wanted pacing included, presumably to improve recruitment.

    In fact there were pretty good controls for CBT and for GET : GET and CBT. And there was no difference. The authors seem to be too dumb to realise that they have a negative result there. If CBT or GET had come out significantly better than the other then we would have had something interesting. The authors claimed that of course pacing was a positive control but it wasn't because there was no brainwashing about getting better in that group.
     
    Inara, Skycloud, Indigophoton and 9 others like this.
  13. MSEsperanza

    MSEsperanza Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    6,922
    Location:
    betwixt and between

    Thanks, @Woolie . I noticed that the trial protocol (2007/BMC) called PACE a "randomised controlled trial" (RCT), but in the title of the Lancet paper ("The Paper" 2011) PACE was downgraded to a "randomised trial".

    (Links to the papers: https://www.s4me.info/threads/publications-from-the-pace-trial.60/)

    But why call a trial arm that does'nt fulfill the criteria of a control group a "control" group? Is there no clearer language?

    Right :) and very contrived indeed.

    Fun fake on Wikipedia's acronym list for PACE:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACE

    EDIT: sorry, @Jonathan Edwards -- crossposted
     
    Inara, Esther12, chrisb and 2 others like this.
  14. Sean

    Sean Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    15,224
    MSEzperanza beat me to it. But here's my post anyway,...

    It was described as controlled in the protocol paper (2007), but not in the main paper (2011). The word control/controlled is only mentioned twice in the main paper, both times in reference to other literature.

    I doubt they relinquished that higher epistemological status voluntarily. It was probably denied them by the reviewers/editors. If so, then it is one thing they did get right.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2018
    Barry, Inara, alex3619 and 5 others like this.
  15. MSEsperanza

    MSEsperanza Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    6,922
    Location:
    betwixt and between
    Good to know!
     
    Inara and Trish like this.
  16. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,073
    Likes Received:
    61,543
    The fact that PACE is not controlled set me thinking about this and I thin it is quite subtle. In most scientific experiments you do a series of controls, each one designed to exclude your test result being due to a non-specific contextual factor. In PACE standard medical care and adaptive pacing are both controls in the sense that they exclude the result being due to just being in a trial over a period of time or just having some form of apparently novel procedure to follow. But they do not form an adequate set of controls.

    So a controlled trial is, if it is to mean anything scientifically useful, a trial with an adequate set of controls. I see it as a bit like a locked house being a house with an adequate set of locks operated, not just a house with a lock.
     
  17. benji

    benji Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    Norway
    Is this really true? Does PACE show that GET reduses PEM? Sounds strange....as some of the other cfs_research says

    <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">And yet PACE found that GET reduced PEM. The difference is between exercise that is benecifial to patients, and that which is harmful. The new CDC guidelines seem to have a fairly good idea.</p>&mdash; CFS Research (@cfs_research) <a href="">July 16, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
     
    Inara likes this.
  18. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    22,376
    Self reported PEM decreased more in the CBT and GET arms, as assessed by questionnaire.

    This doesn't show that CBT/GET reduce PEM because of the subjective unblinded trial design. I am also curious how they defined PEM.
     
    Inara, Zombie Lurker and benji like this.
  19. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    10,902
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    PACE did not find that GET reduced PEM, because PEM was neither defined properly nor measured.
     
    Barry, Inara, Woolie and 7 others like this.
  20. strategist

    strategist Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    22,376
    Do you know how they assessed severity of PEM? What questions were asked, how was PEM defined?
     
    Inara, Trish and benji like this.

Share This Page