1. Guest, read the 'News in Brief' post for w/c 07/01/19 here.
    Dismiss Notice

Predictors of chronic fatigue in adolescents six months after acute Epstein-Barr virus infection: a prospective cohort study,2018,Pedersen et al

Discussion in 'Health News and Research unrelated to ME/CFS' started by Andy, Sep 29, 2018.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Likes Received:
    Hampshire, UK
    I've put this in Research Unrelated to ME/CFS for the time being as the authors seem to do lot of flip-flopping between Chronic Fatigue and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, it could be that it should be in Psychosocial Research.

    Open access at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889159118306251?via=ihub
  2. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Likes Received:
    Prof. Wyller as principal investigator with his BPS approach is usually a red flag. He is currently doing a trial on music therapy as treatment for CFS and wants to research Lightning Process as treatment as well. But he is highly respected within the establishment and has a lot of influence, particularly when it comes to children/adolescents and ME.
  3. wdb

    wdb Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Likes Received:
    A couple of interesting bits
    andypants, MEMarge, Hutan and 4 others like this.
  4. Amw66

    Amw66 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Likes Received:
    Can someone explain why the Chalder Fatigue scale is synonymous with any study of this type?
    Does it have relevance?
    andypants, MEMarge and Trish like this.
  5. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    I think this study is worth us having a careful look at. As a semi-prospective study (measurements 1 month and 6 (7?) months after EBV infection) with a wide range of measurements, it has some good points. Unfortunately, these good points just help to make their conclusion that the study confirms the BPS theory of dysfunctional beliefs seem a lot more credible.

    It's important to note that a large number of adolescents were classified as having chronic fatigue at followup (91/195), but much smaller numbers met criteria for CFS (20 for CCC). The authors believe that their findings for chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome cohorts are similar (although they give us no data to support that). So they say that chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome are not different things - and that they didn't have enough people with CFS to draw any statistically valid conclusions separate from the chronic fatigue cohort.

    I can't spend more time on it now, but I will try to come back to this study. I'd like to see others have a good look at it. As well as working out how the researchers' bias has affected their conclusions, I think there may be some useful information in it,

    (e.g. people infected with EBV had, on average, lower CRP than healthy controls at one month. But those who went on to still be fatigued at followup had, on average, higher CRP than healthy controls at one month. It would be so good to see a scatter chart, with people meeting CFS criteria differentiated.)
  6. Michiel Tack

    Michiel Tack Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Likes Received:
    Yeah, they give the impression throughout the study that their results also apply to ME/CFS, because results for this subgroup were similar. Only at the end is it noted that:

    "As relatively few individuals in the EBV infected group adhered to case definitions of CFS at 6 months follow-up, a multiple logistic regression analysis featuring CFS caseness as dependent variable was not statistically feasible."

    Also important to take into account:

    "the final multiple regression models only explained about one third of the variance in six months fatigue, suggesting that non-charted variables – ranging from genetic markers to family dynamics – might have important impact, and calling for cautious interpretation of the results."
    andypants, Sean and Hutan like this.

Share This Page