1. Guest, 'News In Brief' from w/c 3rd Dec can be read here.
    Dismiss Notice

Matthew Hotopf on panel deciding criteria for assessing research in REF2021

Discussion in 'PsychoSocial ME/CFS News' started by Esther12, Mar 24, 2018.

  1. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    19,720
    http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref,2021/downloads/Criteria phase panel membership - updated 23.03.18.pdf

    REF2021 is an important process for assessing the quality of research from UK universities, and can have a big impact on future funding that they attract.

    REF2014 was full of BS spun submissions about how much great research on CFS had been done by White/Sharpe/etc/etc. It seemed like this all sailed through.

    Hotopf often co-authors with Wessely, and seemed unable to understand problems with research like PACE: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4585442/

    I've tried to find ways of drawing attention to problems with the REF2014 process, but have failed. I don't even really know how the REF2014 process assessed submissions on things like PACE. It would be good if REF2021 didn't turn into a celebration of hype and quackery.
     
    inox, ladycatlover, rvallee and 10 others like this.
  2. Adrian

    Adrian Administrator

    Messages:
    3,050
    Likes Received:
    14,858
    Location:
    UK
    Most research seems to involves a lot of hype so that may be hard.
     
  3. Peter Trewhitt

    Peter Trewhitt Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    4,328
    I have no specific knowledge, but this seems to be a very important topic.

    Could we as a group ask them for clarification of their views on monitoring such as outcome switching and collecting subjects response before trial registration, and their views on using only subjective outcomes in unblinded trials? Presenting these in the context of high levels of spending in the UK on research on the BPS approaches to ME in contrast to minimal spending on biomedical research. EG the prestigious UK Biobank has had to rely on patient and charitable contributions and (albeit not insignificant) international funding.

    It could be that they will ignore (corrected typo) this, but at least it puts them on notice.
     
    inox, MEMarge, ScottTriGuy and 5 others like this.
  4. Esther12

    Esther12 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    19,720
    inox and MEMarge like this.
  5. MEMarge

    MEMarge Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    3,752
    I am just getting error msg when type in above. If I try link directly it just goes to med school info.
     
    ladycatlover and chrisb like this.
  6. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    8,245
    Given that Hotopf, Wessely and Sharpe in their book Chronic Fatigue and its Syndromes made clear their failure to understand a literary construction which should have been straightforward for an able GCSE student, it is perhaps not surprising that they might struggle with more complex matters.

    It might be recalled that they attributed to Rachel Jenkins views about hysteria which she quite clearly did not hold. She was paraphrasing Donald Acheson, who was setting up a strawman for demolition. Such grasp of literary technique might explain more.
     
    inox, Sean, ladycatlover and 3 others like this.
  7. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    4,325
    Likes Received:
    31,737
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    ladycatlover likes this.

Share This Page