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
https://wordpress.com/post/peterkempblog.wordpress.com/10
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.
And below is a table illustrating various interpretations of the ‘Normal Range’ SF36PF (Short Form…
View original post 2,729 more words
andrewpaulkleinblog 