Efficacy and Acceptance of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Adults with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Meta-analysis, 2024, Maas genannt Bermpohl et al.

[Sean]

However, this overemphasizes the assumed effect of blinding in trials, which is not reflected in clinical data

Ah, the old it doesn't match what we [believe we] see in the clinic therefore the trial data must be wrong gambit.

So why bother with trials at all? Clearly the only evidence you will accept is anything that can be twisted to support your pre-existing views. Just declare whatever result you want and stop pretending and wasting all that money and time.

 

[rvallee]

So the same arguments again: because the high risk of bias is due "to the nature of conventional psychotherapeutic trial designs" it should somehow be less important? And reference [56] is again the MetaBlind study. Although it could not find an effect of blinding the reviewers misrepresent its findings because it clearly stated that "blinding should remain a methodological safeguard in trials."

Hey, it makes sense if you don't think about it and want those outcomes to be true regardless of whether they are. Because of this, the high bias is a feature, not a bug. Otherwise how could they claim those false things?

 

[rvallee]

Also frustrating that they interpret drop-out rates as an indicator of acceptance of CBT

Every good service business knows that your most satisfied clients are those who never come back. Come on this is business 101.

 

[dave30th]

I noticed that in some of the trials they included, only a minority of patients met CFS criteria. I only read the review once but could not find any mention of this, which is rather misleading.

They mention that in a few cases the definition of CFS used was a cut-off on an appropriate scale--i e the chalder fatigue scale

 

[rvallee]

So the most recent one is from 2021, that's around the last update of the Cochrane review, which is largely identical to this. Most are before 2015. So nothing new. And all the studies use the same general approach and methodology, so it's basically about 20 times the same thing. How can this review even be justified outside of simply adding yet another "because we also say so"?

It's really hard to accept that our lives are destroyed by such mediocrity.

 

[Sean]

It's really hard to accept that our lives are destroyed by such mediocrity.

It is usually the mediocrities that do the destroying. It is the one thing they are not mediocre at.

I wish that was a joke.

 

[NelliePledge]

Every good service business knows that your most satisfied clients are those who never come back. Come on this is business 101.

 

[ME/CFS Skeptic]

They mention that in a few cases the definition of CFS used was a cut-off on an appropriate scale--i e the chalder fatigue scale

Ah yes I see now. Strange decision.