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 15th April 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Leonard Jason research finds that many young people have ME/CFS (Simon M blog)

Discussion in 'ME/CFS research news' started by Simon M, Feb 4, 2020.

  1. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,198
    Location:
    Australia
    I would not be surprised if it turns out that ME is quite common, especially in the milder forms, and is actually the underlying explanation for a large chunk of (misdiagnosed) 'psycho-behavioural disorders'.
     
  2. ME/CFS Skeptic

    ME/CFS Skeptic Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,511
    Location:
    Belgium
    Before I forget:

    In the context of the CCI-discussion, Jonathan Edwards said he has been getting opinions from professionals in various specialities who are deeply involved in ME/CFS care - rheumatologists, paediatricians, neurologists etc. Apparently there was a complete consensus that (my bolding): "ME/CFS is a well established syndrome with a prevalence of about 0.2-0.4%, higher in adolescence where the illness may be relatively short lived."

    Source: https://www.s4me.info/threads/conce...ty-surgery-in-me-cfs.9638/page-64#post-234812

    That would support the findings of the recent study by Jason et al. (and be contrary to the point I was trying to make based on personal experience).
     
  3. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341


    My son became ill with acute onset, following whooping cough and then a series of viruses, in early 1999. His comprehensive school had around 1000 pupils (aged from 12 to 17+) on the school roll. I was told that year by the LEA home tutor, that one other child at my son's school currently had a diagnosis of ME, was also unable to attend school at all and also in receipt of LEA funded home tuition - so that was 2 per 1000 with a dx of ME on home tuition.

    One of the senior staff recalled that a couple of pupils who were the children of a school governor had also been diagnosed with ME a few years prior to my son. But she didn't seem to be aware of too many other cases within the school - at least not pupils who were too ill to attend any lessons.

    I recall reading an account of a comprehensive school in the Norfolk area that had had a cluster of around 7 or 8 pupils all with a diagnosis of ME; at the time, this was considered an usually large cluster within one school.

    But around 8 per 1000 across all 12 to 17+ year old school pupils sounds a little high. But I've not read the paper yet and perhaps this includes pupils who were able to attend for most lessons or had periodically patchy attendance but were not so affected that they required one to one home tutoring.
     
  4. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341

    No EWOs (Education Welfare Officers) chasing up frequent non attenders, then?
     
    ladycatlover likes this.
  5. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,285
    Location:
    UK
    How can we forget Esther Crawley's infamous school absence study. That was designed, allegedly, to find undiagnosed children with CFS. I can't remember how many she said she'd found.
     
    ladycatlover and Invisible Woman like this.
  6. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341

    Good points, Forbin. And teachers are also exposed to hundreds of children in a day. I've come across a lot of teachers with ME - former nurses, too.

    Here in the UK, primary schools still hold morning assemblies where the entire school plus teaching staff are all huddled together in one room.
     
  7. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341

    Quite high. 2 to 4% rings a bell. But this would need checking.
     
    ladycatlover likes this.
  8. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2020
  9. adambeyoncelowe

    adambeyoncelowe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,732
    Potentially, but the EWOs aren't teachers or students, so it doesn't necessarily follow that kids and teachers would always be aware of kids with ME.

    I can fully imagine people in understaffed, overcrowded schools quite easily ignoring/forgetting/overlooking the kids who never turn up.
     
  10. dave30th

    dave30th Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,246
    out of 140+ identified as having missed too much school for unexplained reasons, she diagnosed 20+ as having the illness. That's from memory--I haven't double-checked.
     
  11. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,095
    Remission should be used in situations like this, given they might become ill again.

    Taking these figures at face value, they show that recovery is quite common in children, though it depends how it was defined.
     
  12. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341

    From the PDF of the paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3244656/pdf/bmjopen-2011-000252.pdf

    "In school-based clinics, 28 of the 2855 (0.98%) children aged 11-16 years were missing ≥ 20% of school and were diagnosed as having CFS/ME. Of these, only 3 of 28 (10.7%) had received a diagnosis and accessed specialist treatment. The duration of symptoms in those identified through clinics was comparable to those referred to via health services, but they were not as severely affected. Outcomes following treatment were encouraging."

    Key messages

    - 1.0% of enrolled children missed ≥ 20% of school because of CFS/ME.
    - Fewer than one in five children with CFS/ME had received a diagnosis and been offered treatment.
    - Children with CFS/ME who were detected through school-based clinics were less severely affected than children referred via health services and appeared to do well once treated.

    Strengths and limitations of this study

    - Children were offered assessment regardless of how their absence had been classified.
    - All children given a diagnosis of CFS/ME were screened for other medical and emotional causes of fatigue and were prospectively characterised and followed up.
    - School clinics were conducted in three schools in the south west, which has a well-established specialist CFS/ME service.

    Results may not be generalisable to regions without a CFS/ME service or to regions with different socioeconomic factors that impact on school attendance.

    --------------------

    I still have a memory of Crawley claiming 2% prevalence in a study conducted locally to her area (possibly before the pilot SMILE Trial). But I'll have to search for this.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2020
    Invisible Woman, Michelle and Simon M like this.
  13. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    A 2018 Crawley paper:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5919160/

    Crawley E. (2018). Pediatric chronic fatigue syndrome: current perspectives. Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics, 9, 27–33. doi:10.2147/PHMT.S126253



    "The prevalence of CFS in children and adolescents is between 0.11% and 4%.14–19"

    (...)

    "Incidence

    "There is little known about the incidence of pediatric CFS/ME. The estimated incidence of pediatrician-diagnosed CFS/ME in the Netherlands is 0.01%17 but this is likely to be lower than the true incidence as not all children with CFS get a diagnosis.19 In the UK, an incidence of 0.36% in a 4–6 month window has been reported but the number of cases was low (4/1096)23 and therefore, the true incidence of CFS/ME remains uncertain."
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2020
    Invisible Woman, Michelle and Simon M like this.
  14. Simon M

    Simon M Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    891
    Location:
    UK
    Prevalence: Jason versus Crawley

    I have gone through the Esther Crawley paper and its findings are very much in line with the Lenny Jason one, showing relatively high rates of ME/CFS in young people. The finding that the cases from this surveillance study were less severely affected than those diagnosed normally in the clinic also supports the discussion on this thread about this approach picking up milder cases.

    However, there are some significant differences between the studies that probably has a bearing on the prevalence rates they calculated.

    The Jason study takes the normal approach of assuming that people lost along the way (did not attend et cetera) are the same as those who did and calculating prevalence accordingly. The Crawley study completely ignores them, effectively assuming there were zero cases (and they lost up to 1/3 of relevant people along the way). Recalculating the prevalence from the Crawley study on the same basis that as the Jason one gives a prevalence of 1.4% versus 0.75% in Jason.

    On the other hand, the Crawley study diagnosed using the NICE criteria, which are considerably looser than those used by Jason, which will lead to higher prevalence study.

    Interestingly, of the people assessed in the clinic, and the Crawley study 55% (23/42) were diagnosed as having ME/CFS, compared with 25% (42/165) for the Jason study. This supports the idea of Jason using stricter criteria, though the two figures are not directly comparable because the studies use different screening criteria.

    Allowing for the looser diagnostic criteria in the Crawley study, its 1.4% prevalence figure is probably pretty similar to the 0.75% found by Jason.

    Crawley study: school cases versus specialist service cases


    People diagnosed in the school surveillance studies were considerably less disabled than those in the clinic (and both appear to be less disabled than for adult studies I've seen).

    SF 36 physical function score: school 77.5; clinic 49
    (the study actually used a 10-30 scale for SF 36, I have converted to the more normal 0-100 scale)
    Chalder fatigue score: school 20/33; clinic 24.4
    School attendance: School 66%; clinic 39%
    Number of symptoms: school 6.6; clinic 8.5
     
  15. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,584
    Location:
    UK
  16. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    21,944
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
  17. boolybooly

    boolybooly Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    514
    This is great and deserves as much exposure as it can get.

    This study from Professor Leonard Jason et al is invaluable because through common sense epidemiology it provides an accurate narrative to help counter the confusion of preceding decades.

    The hope being that if decision makers have a clear picture of what is going on they will make the right decisions and have a hard time justifying it if they don't!
     
  18. Webdog

    Webdog Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,265
    Location:
    Holodeck #2
    I suspect some of the younger kids get misdiagnosed with ADHD. Everyone knows about ADHD... few are looking for ME/CFS.

    As David S. Bell writes:
     
    epipnoia, Michelle, Amw66 and 6 others like this.
  19. Sisyphus

    Sisyphus Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    458
    3/4 of 1% seems high, that's higher than the incidence in adults. What are the criteria, and what is the severity threshold?

    From personal experience I believe there is - OK, there may be - a pre-ME warning stage, where one gets "weird" episodes of brain fog and lethargy for no reason but without the post-exercise/post activity crash which is a hallmark of ME. A way to Dx during the just-a-hint stage could perhaps head off many cases of the full wretched disaster that is M.E.
     
    Michelle, Dolphin and Theresa like this.
  20. Webdog

    Webdog Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,265
    Location:
    Holodeck #2
    For comparison, a recent estimate based on medical claims data and machine learning gives a predicted prevalence of .857% in the US.

    Estimating Prevalence, Demographics and Costs of ME/CFS Using Large Scale Medical Claims Data and Machine Learning
    https://www.s4me.info/threads/estim...ne-learning-2018-valdez-proskauer-et-al.7279/

    The recent Levine/Hanson paper abstract states that "The latest worldwide prevalence rate projects that over 65 million patients suffer from myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS)". But I'm not sure where this paper gets the worldwide prevalence from.

    65 million / 7.7 billion people = .84%.

    Comprehensive Circulatory Metabolomics in ME/CFS Reveals Disrupted Metabolism of Acyl Lipids and Steroids: Levine, Hanson et al 2020
    https://www.s4me.info/threads/compr...-and-steroids-levine-hanson-et-al-2020.13222/
     
    Michelle, Sisyphus and Andy like this.

Share This Page