PACE Trial Participants – were they exploited?

False and misleading reports about PACE Trial participants


Analysis and opinion by Peter Kemp MA

September 2016
[Emphases throughout are added]
This article follows-on from my Blog:

The PACE Trial ‘Normal Range’ – an Untenable Construct

which analysed the PACE Trial authors’ justifications for discarding the Protocol Primary Outcome Measures and use of ‘Normal Range’ as a measure of efficacy for treatments.

 As a reminder, here is how ‘Normal Range’ compares with the Primary Outcome Measures which the PACE Trial authors’ discarded.  The chart is adapted directly from one published in The Lancet, with the addition of orange lines showing outcome thresholds.  The blue line shows 3 times the difference between SSMC (Control Group) and GET/CBT.  The Protocol anticipated that the difference between SSMC and GET/CBT would be 2 to 3 times, which would indicate a clinical improvement over and above the control group.lancetsf36_pf_2016 And below is a table illustrating various interpretations of the ‘Normal Range’ SF36PF (Short Form…

View original post 2,729 more words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s