UK:ME Association funds research for a new clinical assessment toolkit in NHS ME/CFS specialist services, 2023

So would I be right to summarise as the problem being Tyson et al?
Yes, if you include in 'et al' all of BACME and their continuing dominance in ME/CFS provision. If FUNCAP were adopted instead of the Tyson PROMs it could still be a problem if it's used to justify ongoing rehab style clinics, though it might be harder to misuse it to pretend the clinics are showing patients' health improving.
 
1. This iteration of a PROM for pwME
Or
2. Any PROM for pwME
3.would it be possible to write a PROM for ME/CFS without it being harmful?
4. Would it be possible to write a PROM for ME/CFS that is useful to pwME?

I'm objecting to pretending to measure outcomes when they are not offering treatment. There is nothing to measure.

When we have a promising candidate we can start designing measures to show whether it works as expected.

Currently we do not.
 
So you are objecting to PROMs?

More to the inappropriate use of them.

If a thing claims to be a measure, it must be clear what it's measuring and that it is in fact measurable.

The clinics do not offer treatment for ME/CFS, so what are they measuring?

The effect of advice and information, for instance, could only be measured if there was a mechanism to establish what people already knew and understood before they went. We have yet to see that questionnaire.


[Edited to add the word "questionnaire", which I thought I'd typed!]
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom