1. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 29th June 2020 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Guest, the DecodeME study has announced £3.2m of funding, click here to read about it.
    Dismiss Notice

Corrected proof: Treatment outcome in adults with CFS: a prospective study in England based on the CFS/ME National Outcomes Database- Crawley,White

Discussion in 'PsychoSocial ME/CFS Research' started by Sly Saint, Jun 30, 2020 at 3:17 PM.

  1. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,689
    Likes Received:
    39,181
    Location:
    UK
    Treatment outcome in adults with chronic fatigue syndrome: a prospective study in England based on the CFS/ME National Outcomes Database

    E Crawley, S M Collin, P D White, K Rimes, J A C Sterne, M T May CFS/ME National Outcomes Database

    (originally published 2013)

    https://academic.oup.com/qjmed/article/doi/10.1093/qjmed/hcaa090/5828335
     
  2. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,998
    Likes Received:
    30,351
    Location:
    Canada
    But. We know for a fact that those services don't do any such monitoring of outcomes, they consider every patient as a personal journey of discovery, or whatever. And the outcomes cited above are only minimally relevant, certainly not to outcomes. We also know there is no consistency between the services, everything is basically ad hoc, the clinics make their own choices and even "personalize", whatever that means, everything for every patient. There literally cannot be any reliable data given that.

    So did the services lie in response to FOI requests when asked to provide them for the paper that evaluated their service evaluation? Did they keep this data secret and lie about not having them? Where does this data otherwise come from? And who lied and for what purpose?

    This late correction is really bizarre. Looks like some legal CYA.
     
  3. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,792
    Likes Received:
    37,812
    Presumably ethical approval is distinct from whether there are methodological issues using pre-acquired data from a service evaluation in a research study claiming in its title to be prospective?
     
  4. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,689
    Likes Received:
    39,181
    Location:
    UK
    It was one of the numerous papers where Crawley 'reused' the same REC number (07/Q2006/48)

    see:
    https://www.s4me.info/threads/david...how-to-avoid-ethical-review.6653/#post-121341
     
    MSEsperanza, Barry, rvallee and 3 others like this.
  5. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Moderator

    Messages:
    5,030
    Likes Received:
    33,493
    Location:
    UK West Midlands
    MSEsperanza, Barry, Sean and 2 others like this.

Share This Page