1. Guest, click here and read the 'News in Brief' post for w/c 8th July.
    Dismiss Notice

Cochrane: Cochrane considering the repositioning of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Kalliope, Dec 2, 2018.

  1. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,048
    Likes Received:
    21,185
    Location:
    Norway
    Apologies if it has been posted before. I've heard about it, but haven't seen this official statement from Cochrane about it. It's not dated, but listed on 3.rd place on the front page of Cochrane, so I gather the statement is new?

    Cochrane considering the repositioning of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

    The Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Review Group currently sits within the Brain, Nerves and Mind (BNM) Network. In the future, reviews on this topic might sit with another Cochrane Review Group within the BNM Network, or they might transfer to another Network altogether, such as the Long Term Conditions and Ageing 2 Network.

    This is currently under consideration and a decision is anticipated before the end of 2018.

    ETA: It's from today

    ETA: It's from one month ago (Nov. 2) but don't think there's a separate thread on it yet.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
    Sing, James, Joel and 24 others like this.
  2. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,048
    Likes Received:
    21,185
    Location:
    Norway
    In response to concerns raised by members of the Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)/myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy) (ME) community, Cochrane has been considering repositioning the editorial oversight of CFS/ME reviews.

    I hope the overwhelming amount of research pointing towards ME not being a psychosomatic condition, but a biological disease, also plays a role in this.
     
    Sing, dangermouse, Joel and 21 others like this.
  3. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,386
    Likes Received:
    29,266
  4. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,048
    Likes Received:
    21,185
    Location:
    Norway
  5. InitialConditions

    InitialConditions Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    742
    Location:
    North-west England
    Maybe worth a letter of support for a move to a new group, just to nudge them on their way....
     
  6. Peter Trewhitt

    Peter Trewhitt Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    762
    Likes Received:
    7,649
    This 'announcement' seemed to first appear in a reply to a comment on the Review in October, and when I looked earlier this week I still did not find anywhere else.

    Perhaps it was published in this more conspicuous location with the site updates following the decision to reject the redraft of the exercise review announced on Friday.

    [Though I could have missed it, as the 2nd of November could reflect a reasonable timescale to follow up on a reply to the comment dated 18th of October.]
     
  7. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,386
    Likes Received:
    29,266
    We could have an interesting juxtaposition emerging:
    • Cochrane reclassifying ME/CFS such that it is no longer within the Common Mental Disorders Review Group.
    • Larun's existing Cochrane ME/CFS exercise review withdrawn in all but name, which was carried out by members of the Common Mental Disorders Review Group. Their resubmission has been rejected, which the notional intention of them doing it better and resubmitting again.
    • So let's assume the decision is made, by end 2018, that ME/CFS will be moved out of the Common Mental Disorders Review Group.
    • The resubmission is incredibly unlikely to occur before end of 2018, given the authors will need to go and find some extra special magic wands.
    • What would be the point of Cochrane countenancing reincarnating a review for ME/CFS, from within a review group ME is no longer going to belong to? Cochrane will have clearly indicated ME is not a mental health condition, and any reviews by people presuming that, will be recognised as inherently biased from the outset.
     
  8. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,005
    Likes Received:
    21,642
    Location:
    UK East Midlands
    Yes @Barry ive been speculating on the other thread https://www.s4me.info/threads/30th-nov-cochrane-have-not-approved-publication-of-the-larun-re‐submission-but-old-version-not-withdrawn-either.6990/page-3#post-126604 that Larun & co making a managed retreat might be the least worst option for them and as well as the review being “out of date” the move to another group would provide a further neutral cover story for a statement by Cochrane that would have limited reputational impact for the authors
     
  9. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,386
    Likes Received:
    29,266
    And provided Cochrane do not do an about turn on this, then the implications for the new NICE guideline will be very significant, as well as for Carol Monaghan's HoC debate if she manages to get it. And given the politically driven moves afoot to slide MUS under the radar of good science, and treat under the mental health umbrella, I think it will have implications for those trying to include ME within that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
    Stuart, dangermouse, rvallee and 9 others like this.

Share This Page