Engaging stakeholders to refine an activity pacing framework for chronic pain/fatigue: A nominal group technique -Antcliff, Keenan et al Nov 2019

Discussion in 'Other psychosomatic news and research' started by Sly Saint, Nov 22, 2019.

  1. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,621
    Location:
    UK
    Engaging stakeholders to refine an activity pacing framework for chronic pain/fatigue: A nominal group technique
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/msc.1430

    (not yet available on sci-hub)
     
    Michelle, Barry, Sean and 2 others like this.
  2. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,729
    Location:
    UK West Midlands
    How can you make a ‘scientific paper’ out of holding a workshop. People across the entire economy are holding workshop type meetings every day.
     
    MEMarge, ladycatlover, Barry and 8 others like this.
  3. ME/CFS Skeptic

    ME/CFS Skeptic Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,648
    Location:
    Belgium
  4. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    53,333
    Location:
    UK
    This worries me. Pacing for pain will depend on the cause of the pain. Same for fatigue. And for ME it will be completely different.
     
    MEMarge, Michelle, Mij and 13 others like this.
  5. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,889
    Location:
    Canada
    That's a completely pointless exercise. It takes the two most common symptoms in all of medicine, both with entire ranges of different meanings and circumstances, and tries to find a universal framework. This is way over simplistic and essentially pointless because of the confusion that has polluted the entire field of medicine around those two symptoms.

    Of course normally this kind of thing would be modulated by an understanding that there are exceptions but this is precisely one area where this fails miserably and universally in practice because it's far too generic and open to interpretation and boy is there a lot of interpretation going on about chronic symptoms, especially those two.

    You can stop paving the road to hell. It's seriously over-paved as it is. It has so many layers of paving in fact that it's getting inoperable. Good intentions without common sense all lead to the same place.
     
    Hutan, Michelle, Mij and 7 others like this.
  6. PhysiosforME

    PhysiosforME Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    306
    Thanks for highlighting this - we have been in email correspondence with the authors and were quite forceful back to them when they rejected our challenge about the need to highlight the difference for people with ME
    Will definitely get on this one ASAP
     
  7. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,498
    Thank you
     
    MEMarge, ladycatlover, Barry and 4 others like this.
  8. PhysiosforME

    PhysiosforME Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    306
    Mithriel, MEMarge, Sly Saint and 13 others like this.
  9. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,386
    Communication is about listeners comprehending a message and gaining new insights from it. Information overload achieves none of that, and if anything alienates people to any further attempts. You got it right I think.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2019
    JemPD, NelliePledge, Sarah94 and 5 others like this.
  10. PhysiosforME

    PhysiosforME Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    306
    thank you
     
  11. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,889
    Location:
    Canada
    This is excellent. Thank you! Even if it doesn't lead to immediate change, it's important to have it out there, to add up to the evidence of how morally and intellectually bankrupt the entire BPS ME paradigm is. Opinions matter, but people should not be allowed their own facts.
     
    MEMarge, JaneL, JemPD and 3 others like this.
  12. ladycatlover

    ladycatlover Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,702
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    Bit of a small sample. 10! And WTF is "purposive sampling"?
     
    Michelle and Barry like this.
  13. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,938
    Location:
    London, UK
    It's nominal group apparently.
    A group in name but maybe no more.
     
    Michelle, ladycatlover and Barry like this.
  14. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,938
    Location:
    London, UK
    It really is ridiculous that this 'study' is published in something you have to pay for access to.
    In whose interest is it to put something on the internet in this form when one of the authors could have put it on a public website?
    Who is this for? - I get the strong impression it is for the benefit of professionals, not patients.
     
    TrixieStix, Mithriel, MEMarge and 5 others like this.
  15. PhysiosforME

    PhysiosforME Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    306
    You also cannot write to respond to articles published in this journal - we tried!
     
    Mithriel, MEMarge, Hutan and 8 others like this.
  16. ladycatlover

    ladycatlover Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,702
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    That's bloody disgusting. :mad: Speechless beyond wot i just sed.
     
  17. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,386
    https://methods.sagepub.com/reference/encyclopedia-of-survey-research-methods/n419.xml

    "A purposive sample, also referred to as a judgmental or expert sample, is a type of nonprobability sample. The main objective of a purposive sample is to produce a sample that can be logically assumed to be representative of the population. This is often accomplished by applying expert knowledge of the population to select in a nonrandom manner a sample of elements that represents a cross-section of the population."

    So there you go then - no chance of any kind of selection bias there then! "Expert knowledge", "logically assumed". What could possibly go wrong :rolleyes:.
     
  18. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,938
    Location:
    London, UK
    So that's it then. Western culture has turned into.... moosh

    What hope is there?

    Little hope that the Oxford Dictionary recognises 'nonprobability' as the neologism of the year.

    Yet there is hope - there is S4ME.
     
    TrixieStix, Mithriel, MEMarge and 5 others like this.
  19. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,938
    Location:
    London, UK
    Would you believe it, Wikipedia tells us:

    Nonprobability sampling does not meet this criterion and, as any methodological decision, should adjust to the research question that one envisages to answer. Nonprobability sampling techniques are not intended to be used to infer from the sample to the general population in statistical terms. Instead, for example, grounded theory can be produced through iterative non-probability sampling until theoretical saturation is reached (Strauss and Corbin, 1990).
     
    TrixieStix, Mithriel, Hutan and 3 others like this.
  20. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    53,333
    Location:
    UK
    What the **** does that mean?
     

Share This Page