Depression in paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome 2013 Bould, Crawley et al

Andy

Andy

Senior Member (Voting rights)
Abstract

Objective
To describe the prevalence of depression in children with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)/myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and investigate the relationship between depression in CFS/ME and clinical symptoms such as fatigue, disability, pain and school attendance.

Design
Cross-sectional survey data using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) collected at assessment.

Setting
Specialist paediatric CFS/ME service in the South West.

Patients
Children aged 12–18 years with CFS/ME.

Main outcome measure
Depression was defined as scoring >9 on the HADS depression scale.

Results
542 subjects had complete data for the HADS and 29% (156/542) (95% CI 25% to 33%) had depression. In a univariable analysis, female sex, poorer school attendance, and higher levels of fatigue, disability, pain, and anxiety were associated with higher odds of depression. Age of child and duration of illness were not associated with depression. In a multivariable analysis, the factors most strongly associated with depression were disability, with higher scores on the physical function subscale of the 36 item Short Form (SF-36).

Conclusions
Depression is commonly comorbid with CFS/ME, much more common than in the general population, and is associated with markers of disease severity. It is important to screen for, identify and treat depression in this population.

Open access, https://adc.bmj.com/content/98/6/425
 
Correction: Depression in paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome, 2022

"The Editor of the journal has agreed to a request from the authors that the ethics statement should be changed to improve its clarity. This request was received in October 2019. Due to an internal miscommunication at the publisher the correction was not made. The publisher apologises for this oversight. The new statement is as follows:

‘The North Somerset & South Bristol Research Ethics Committee decided that the collection and analysis of clinical data collected by the regional specialist service for service evaluation did not require ethical review by a National Health Service Research Ethics Committee or approval from the National Health Service Research & Development Office (07/Q2006/48).’"

https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2022/11/07/archdischild-2012-303396.corr1

@dave30th
 
Another optional requirement.

This is obviously not a service evaluation. Not quite research either but it loosely meets the technical definition of needing this requirement.

Obviously no service was evaluated here, this is extremely insulting to our intelligence. They obviously know this and can't be bothered to pretend to take this seriously. The objective is to describe the prevalence of something, however awfully. There is no evaluation of any service here.

So funny how "depression" is accepted out a single questionnaire, it's indisputable that this means depression, but following strict criteria for ME is unacceptable because "where's the pathophysiology", which is not required of issues labeled depression, but the chemical imbalance or whatever.

At some point we'll reach the point of negative standards if this goes on much longer. There is no pretense at all that there are any standards, optional requirements and "zero tolerance policies" that turn out to be very tolerant for some, it's as free-for-all as any period in history ever was.
 
So, a quarter of children with a severe, chomic illness had depression? And the sicker they were, the more emotional distress they experienced? Exactly what we would expect. It's a Crawley paper though, so I imainge they're trying to claim that depression is a factor in ME.
 
this is one of the seven that did not have corrections made after Crawley was ordered to do so. Archives of Disease in childhoood, which also published the Lightning Process study, had made corrections in one of the papers but not in two. I was pressing the journal to confirm whether or not there was correspondence from Esther. So they're taking the blame here. the thing is, when she asked them and nothing happened, she didn't pursue it. she let it drop. Does not speak well of her integrity. but not as bad as not sending a request at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom