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

GETSET letters in The Lancet

Discussion in 'Psychosomatic news - ME/CFS and Long Covid' started by Skycloud, Mar 23, 2018.

  1. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    If it's PACE cheese it will be full of holes :rolleyes:.
     
    Keela Too, Jan, Awol and 8 others like this.
  2. Skycloud

    Skycloud Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,187
    Location:
    UK
    And stink.
     
    Awol, Luther Blissett, Alvin and 5 others like this.
  3. TiredSam

    TiredSam Committee Member

    Messages:
    10,482
    Location:
    Germany
    Reading this response from the authors, I misread "teletherapy" as "telepathy". Knowing who the authors were, it only caused me to half raise one eyebrow.
     
    Inara, Hutan, Lisa108 and 12 others like this.
  4. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,574
    Location:
    UK
    I have a similar problem whenever I read the word 'the rapist'............did it again
     
    Inara, Hutan, MEMarge and 8 others like this.
  5. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Probably a typo.
     
    Luther Blissett and ladycatlover like this.
  6. Alvin

    Alvin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,309
    Thats no good, i choose to believe its Brie, Feta, Havarti, Mozzarella, Ricotta and Colby
    Hence mining is the only important national concern and should begin immediately :thumbup:
     
  7. Karen Kirke

    Karen Kirke Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    56
    In their response to the points I raised about severe and very severe ME, Clark and colleagues suggest that the "use of teletherapy for patients too unwell to attend clinic is an innovative approach that merits further research.6, 7"

    6 is Clauw's commentary which accompanied the original GETSET publication. 7 is the FITNET trial.


    People with severe ME have voiced their opinions on both teletherapy and graded exercise.


    298 respondents to Action for ME’s 2014 survey identified as severe. “Action for M.E.’s survey asked people with severe M.E. what would make a real different [sic] to their healthcare:

    • 68% said a better informed GP

    • 66% said more effective medication

    • 63% said home visits

    • 53% said joined-up health and social care

    • 36% said having more of a say in their treatment

    • 21% said telehealth”



    See p.11 of https://www.actionforme.org.uk/uploads/pdfs/my-life-stopped-severe-ME-report.pdf


    which quotes from p.27 of https://www.actionforme.org.uk/uploads/pdfs/me-time-to-deliver-survey-report.pdf


    In 2004 the 25% ME Group (who represent those who are bedbound, housebound and use wheelchairs) surveyed a randomly selected 437 of their members. Their report summarises the findings of that survey regarding graded exercise as follows:


    “By far the most unhelpful form of treatment was considered to be Graded Exercise Therapy (GET). [Bold in original.] This is a finding that may surprise some readers, given the current medical popularity of this approach. However, these patients’ perceptions are supported by data from previous experience: of the 39% of our members who had actually used Graded Exercise Therapy, a shocking 82% reported that their condition was made worse by this treatment. On the basis of our members’ experiences we question whether GET is an appropriate approach for patients with ME. It is worth noting that some patients were not severely affected before trying GET. [Bold in original.] Thus, it is not only people with severe ME who may be adversely affected by this form of treatment.”

    The full report can be downloaded here (it’s the March 2005 Severe ME Analysis Report): http://www.25megroup.org/info_group_publications.html
     
    Inara, Hutan, MEMarge and 9 others like this.
  8. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    Sorry if this has been asked already, but did MEA submit their response to GETSET to The Lancet, or did they just not bother because of the conflict between the tiny word limit and Brandolini's Law?
     
    Dolphin, Amw66, ladycatlover and 3 others like this.
  9. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    That was a genuine question, by the way... (albeit a slightly barbed one!).
     
    Amw66 likes this.
  10. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    51,860
    Location:
    UK
    If you want a response from the MEA, @Lucibee, it's worth tagging @Russell Fleming who works for the MEA and can answer questions on their behalf.
     
    Inara and Lucibee like this.
  11. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    Best to tag @Russell Fleming in that case.

    Edit: X-posted with @Trish :).
     
  12. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    I've asked on their FB page as well.

    [Update: No - they didn't submit anything]
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2018
    Esther12 likes this.
  13. Sbag

    Sbag Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    419
    • March 31, 2018
    • The Lancet 391, 10126 (2018)
    • Author: Robert H Saunders
    I was surprised to read that the GETSET trial by Lucy Clark and colleagues1 excluded participants who had physical contraindications to exercise, as such a criterion would appear to exclude anyone suffering from post-exertional malaise (PEM). In its 2015 report,2 the US Institute of Medicine concluded: “There is sufficient evidence that PEM is a primary feature that helps distinguish ME/CFS [myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome] from other conditions”. Indeed, post-exertional neuroimmune exhaustion is a compulsory requirement for a diagnosis of myalgic encephalomyelitis under the International Consensus Criteria.

    From https://www.doctorportal.com.au/cor...elp-for-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-in-getset-3/
     
    MEMarge, Jan, Webdog and 8 others like this.
  14. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,199
    They didn't include how much physical activity the participants undertook in the past week as requested by Anna Wood.
    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)30619-6/fulltext
     
    Snow Leopard, Inara, Lucibee and 5 others like this.
  15. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,199
    It is disappointing that there are again making this point without sharing information about the other subgroup i.e. with the higher baseline scores.

    I tried to deal with this in my (unpublished) letter.
    (Copied from an earlier message)
    I decided to focus on a specific point that I did not see others raising in discussions. Most of my other letters use more references:

    ---

    The journal did take a long time to reply (over 6 months): I am left wondering whether they asked the investigators for their opinion. I could imagine the researchers might try to put the journal off the letter.


    Anyway I've posted it on PubMed Commons: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28648402#cm28648402_78211
    It is now on PubPeer
    https://pubpeer.com/publications/C6228BA4BCA3E4859CDF9F8CF00663
    There's a reasonable possibility those in the group with an initial score of 45+ on the SF-36 physical functioning subscale actually decreased on average.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2018
    Inara, Woolie, Lucibee and 7 others like this.
  16. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,261
    I have not read the paper, and do not know if it is at all relevant, but is there a NNT figure ( as in the quoted 7 for PACE) ?
     
    Snow Leopard likes this.
  17. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,261
    Letters are all excellent- many thanks . I am working up to this degree if lucidity ( hopefully)
     
    Sean, Trish and Webdog like this.
  18. Barry

    Barry Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,385
    MINE, MINE .... ALL MINE!!!
     
    Alvin likes this.
  19. Lucibee

    Lucibee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Mid-Wales
    I'm trying to get my head round why this makes a difference. Surely the difference in the increases between the subgroups is an indication of regression to the mean, in addition to any ceiling effect?

    I guess I'm not clear what they are trying to say and why this is a problem. This is from the main paper:
    A general point about correspondence - if there are lots of letters on an issue, the journal will not generally publish all those that deal with the same point, and will probably ask the authors of the original paper which ones they want to address. There won't necessarily be the in-house expertise to know which letters are most important, so it is likely that the authors will be given this task.
     
  20. Tom Kindlon

    Tom Kindlon Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,199
    Regression to the mean is an interesting possibility.

    I'm not 100% sure what you're saying: they are saying that because the higher group didn't do as well, that's likely because they were already near the maximum (ceiling effects). There could be situations where this arises.

    However, based on the figures here we have enough information to know that the patients in the higher functioning group only approved by a maximum of 2.7 points and may actually have decreased. A final score of around 55 is not near a maximum score unless one is accepting that graded exercise therapy can only bring people up to a very low level which the authors have never conceded.

    Unlike us, the authors have the figures. It would be pretty clear if they gave the figures that their interpretation is not valid. But by not giving the figures people could be taken in by it.
     
    ukxmrv, Sean, Inara and 6 others like this.

Share This Page