1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Efficacy of web-based cognitive–behavioural therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: randomised controlled trial (2018) Knoop

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic research - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Esther12, Feb 2, 2018.

  1. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    Here is an example of what they recommend in their manual (this manual isn't specifically mentioned in this study). I think it is completely reckless but imagine that very few patients actually try to stick to it for very long:
     
  2. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
  3. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    Yes, the text confirms this:

     
  4. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    I find it interesting to see the individual data in studies, like they have given here. Though I would have been more interested in other outcome measures than fatigue.

    Janse figure 3.PNG
     
  5. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    These people were a lot healthier at baseline than for example the people in the PACE trial.

    Average SF-36 physical functioning (0-100) score:
    PACE trial: 38.05
    This trial: 62.5

    Average Chalder fatigue questionnaire (0-33) score:
    PACE trial: 28.2
    This trial: 24.1
     
  6. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,393
    I wondered about that. It felt like there was something missing there.

    Missing data for appx 25% of the protocol-driven group and the control group, isn't great, but it was down to 15% missing for the feedback on demand group.

    Maybe there is some sub-group for whom a minimal form of CBT, with little involvement of a therapist, could be useful? Maybe that would make it easier for people to make use of any bits they found useful, and dismiss the rest?

    Also - maybe these studies are getting increasingly unrepresentative samples that include those more likely to benefit from some sort of CBT-style intervention? Or maybe a wait-list control is demoralising and is worse than nothing?

    So hard to say. These researcher's history of hyping and misrepresenting CBT as a treatment for CFS gives rise to some justified scepticism of any purported positive results. [edit: but if were were to take them at face value and ignore possible problems with a wait list control, the actimeter results for the on-demand CBT group look better than what we tend to see].

    Yes - would be interesting to see the acitgraphy data.
     
    Invisible Woman, Wonko, Barry and 3 others like this.
  7. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,393
    Dolphin likes this.
  8. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,041
    Location:
    Australia
    Thus proving yet again just how utterly disconnected these clowns are from human reality.
     
    Invisible Woman, Inara, Wonko and 2 others like this.
  9. Valentijn

    Valentijn Guest

    Messages:
    2,275
    Location:
    Netherlands
    The Dutch fatigue clinic I went to rated me as "passive" based on my actometer data, but I was also crashing a lot like a boom-and-bust "relatively active" patient. So the psychologist and relaxation therapist (who used stealth-GET) were telling me I needed to do more, while the occupational therapist and physiotherapist were more focused on stabilization. They really don't have any conception of disease severity - it's just one type of crazy (passive) or a contradictory type of crazy (boom-and-bust) which somehow has the same cause and needs pretty much the same treatment :confused:

    I think these are both factors. My observation was that most patients at Dutch fatigue clinics do not have ME/CFS. Out of the 1-2 dozen I saw regularly in the waiting rooms, only 2-3 of us were moderate or worse. The rest were either very mild or had a different form of fatigue which was not physically disabling them at all.

    And giving worse scores on questionnaires may be a desperate plea for immediate help from waiting list patients who think there is an effective treatment available.
     
  10. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    I also wonder how they ascertain from a distance how closely people are adhering to what they are actually being asked to do. How do they know, for instance, that the CBT sessions aren't in fact resulting in people learning how to pace themselves better.
     
  11. Londinium

    Londinium Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    270
    This study is a bit of a head scratcher for me. One of the main (highly legitimate) criticisms of these trials is the lack of objective measures. Yet here the authors appear to have a statistically significant result when using activity monitors but tend to downplay that in the text. I find that puzzling - if I were the authors that would be plastered all over the page.

    (I suspect the positive result is due to selection criteria - as others have already noted above - but need to spend more time with the paper. Though as I’m being dragged into the office today against my will there’s a good chance that’ll have to wait until after my resulting crash :grumpy:)
     
  12. Valentijn

    Valentijn Guest

    Messages:
    2,275
    Location:
    Netherlands
    The Dutch BPS group engage in some interesting shenanigans at times, like declaring completely untreated patients cured by CBT. They might be downplaying actometer results to avoid further scrutiny.
     
  13. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    (Not very exciting) From the protocol paper:
     
  14. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    From the protocol paper:
    Janse protocol table 2.png
     
  15. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    From the protocol paper:
    Firstly, I doubt a lot of these are truly recovered.
    Also there is no sign that participants hear from patients who believe some or all of the programme made them worse.
     
  16. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    From the protocol paper:
     
  17. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    That's interesting.

    According to the protocol, somebody with a low level of activity is not supposed to go to a stabilisation period even though they could be fluctuating, but just at a lower level of activity.

    From the protocol paper:

     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2018
  18. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    From the protocol paper:
     
  19. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,980
    It would be interesting to have data on these goal sheets and for an independent person to assess whether patients had reached such goals. I don't believe the Dutch CBT school ever discuss these goal sheets in terms of outcomes in published papers.
     
  20. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,674
    Location:
    UK
    They would appear to be totally barking.
     

Share This Page