Another 'who said' post! I've got Vink's paper (2016). Even the PACE authors themselves say there was no difference between groups in lost employment, before or after the trial, and yet CBT and GET were more expensive anyway, and that may be enough. In general benefits is a terrible, terrible judge of wellness. Like, you just KNOW that the CBT group and GET group were strongly discouraged from applying based off of the very premise: that their recovery will be based on effort alone. But I feel like there were other studies. A Belgian one? that showed no getting back to work. [Edit: it's Dutch, I see!] And did ANYONE actually use actigraphy in GET and CBT without later lighting the data on fire? That'd be a much, much more objective measure of how well the therapy works out.