BMJ: Rapid response to 'Updated NICE guidance on CFS', 2021, Jason Busse et al, Co-chair and members of the GRADE working group

[chrisb]

I forgot to add thatthis discovery of Cott's association with Prisma Health makes it important to discover what, exactly, was the Prisma to which Wessely acknowledged he gave unpaid advice and assistance round about 2001. He did say Prisma and not Prisma Health.

There is a different PRISMA dealing with systematic reviews and meta analysis but it only adopted that name in 2009, before that being known as QUORUM. That would seem to be ruled out.

It would certainly be worth knowing whether SW had input into the Canadian Insurance reference guide for clinicians.
EDIT it has kindly been pointed out to me that we do know a little more about PRISMA.
https://www.s4me.info/threads/gover...blishing-the-bps-model.2319/page-2#post-84353

 

[Barry]

This reckons Prisma Health ...

https://quackbengoldacre.wordpress.com/professorsimonwessely/

Professor Wessely is an advisor to PRISMA Health, which was founded in 1999 and began establishing its programme in Europe and North America.

...

Professor Wessely devised the programme on CFS that PRISMA is selling to insurance companies for people with chronic fatigue syndrome.

But no indication of the authenticity of that information.

Can't see a date for the article but will be no earlier than late 2004, given last paragraph.

 

[Barry]

And this ...

http://www.margaretwilliams.me/2001/information-on-cbt-wessely-and-prisma_2001.pdf

Of special concern is that in PRISMA Company Information, Professor Simon Wessely is a Corporate Officer of PRISMA; he is a member of the Supervisory Board of PRISMA (an interest which he seems never to declare). In order of seniority, he is higher than the Board of Management. He is listed as a world expert in the field of medically unexplained illnesses, including Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

 

[Barry]

This 2001 document notes ...

NOTE TO EDITOR RE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:

Simon Wessely quite rightly declares his involvement with Prisma Health - a commercial organisation that acts for insurance companies by arranging rehabilitation programmes for people with CFS that involve CBT and GE. He does not however refer to the fact that he is a member of the Advisory Panel to the York Systematic Review - surely this should have been noted. And was a doctor so closely involved with the review the correct person to write an editorial that makes a number of very serious criticisms aimed at those of us who act as patient advocates in what is a very difficult area of medicine?

https://sacfs.asn.au/download/talking_point/Talking Point - 2001 Issue 3.pdf

Edit: Forgot to include link. Page 24.

 

[Arnie Pye]

In the US, everyone in Congress, whether inside or outside the administration or executive branch or the presidential party, is part of the "government" and is a "government official." Administration officials come before Congressional committees to testify, and I suppose I or anyone could e-mail someone on the committee to nudge them to ask a question. But they wouldn't bother because they have their own questions to ask. We don't have this kind of process as far as I know.

A rather tongue-in-cheek reply to this... If you want to get a flavour of how UK government works you could watch Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minster - well worth the effort even if rather outdated now.

 

[Barry]

A rather tongue-in-cheek reply to this... If you want to get a flavour of how UK government works you could watch Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minster - well worth the effort even if rather outdated now.

Absolutely. Muted but influential conversations in the corridors of power, I'm sure. Why am I sure? ... because it is part of the human condition. It is a significant part of how those who wield soft power achieve what they do. Much of it off the written record. Much of done to be plausibly deniable. The likes of SW, and many others, excel at it.

And it is nothing new. As old as modern humans itself most likely, possibly older.

 

[MSEsperanza]

I do not recognize most of these names, but it shouldn't surprise us to see Paul Garner and Flottorp, who I recall recently endorsing an RCT of the Lightning Process, on there.

Flottorp is also a close colleague of Lillebeth Larun (main author of the Cochrane review on ME and GET) at the National institute of public health in Norway.

Interestingly, since this is a UK issue first and foremost, Paul Garner seems to be the only UK author on the Busse rapid response. I wonder if he was asked in by Flottorp or Guyatt.

Only now I realized that Flottorp (aka SAF) is also a member of the GRADE Working group.

She is also a member of the GRADE Guidance Group (G3):

In order to more efficiently deal with administrative issues, the GRADE Guidance Group (G3) was established in 2013 with a committee of up to 12 members (increased from 10 to 12 in 2020) including the two co-chairs, with a rotating membership, meeting bimonthly.

Their role is to:

1. Act as an executive committee for the GRADE Working Group (GWG)
2. Provide guidance and ensure accountability of the GWG co-chairs
3. Help set GRADE policies and directions
4. Report to GRADE working group at each GRADE meeting

Members of the G3:

• Gordon Guyatt and Holger Schünemann (co-chairs)

• Elie Akl, Sue Brennan, Pablo Alonso Coello, Philipp Dahm, Marina Davoli, Signe Flottorp, Miranda Langendam, Joerg Meerpohl, Reem Mustafa, María-Ximena Rojas (members)

https://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/


Edit: It seems Flottorp (SAF) was added later to the BMJ rapid response's declaration of competing interests, cf:

It appears to be people from the GRADE working group, which explains a lot about why it produces such poor results: