The decision to abandon the process of re-evaluating reviews recommending exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) has reignited calls to retract this article.
2019 version of Cochrane Library review“Exercise Therapy for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome” has accumulated 67 citations, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science.
This review recommends exercise therapy to treat ME/CFS. This is a treatment approach that has drawn widespread criticism from the patient community and researchers who say that physical activity is not an adequate remedy for this condition. According to petition, cochraneThe editor-in-chief acknowledged that the review in question was “not fit for purpose”. statement I didn’t use that phrase.
Following the eviction, cochrane We then launched a pilot project in October 2019 to revisit the review, which included the creation of an independent advisory group and public consultation.
However, following delays stemming from the Covid-19 pandemic cochrane Lost a lot of funding in UK, publication Announced on December 16th Abandoning updates.
“This was due to a lack of new research in this area and a lack of capacity to oversee the work needed, which typically far exceeded the resources allocated to individual reviews.” cochrane the spokesperson said retraction watch. “We have no plans to revisit this decision.”
cochrane Suddenly stopped communicating and said the pilot made little effort to explain why it was abandoned Hilda Bastianan Australian metascientist, author and cartoonist, was a founding member of the Cochrane Collaboration. “It’s hard to find the words to describe how badly they treated everyone involved in this,” she said. “That was pretty scary behavior.”
The review added: “Very poor quality” Joe EdwardsEmeritus Professor of Connective Tissue Medicine, University College London. Edwards said he has seen several previous versions of the review. “It generates the message. What is this against? nice [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence] evaluation “We’re creating patient interest, we’re not just having patient interest,” he said.
a petition The call for the review to be retracted was launched in September 2023 and has so far attracted more than 14,000 signatures from the patients and researchers involved.
“The Covid-19 pandemic has created even more need for evidence-based evaluation of proposed treatments for ME/CFS,” the petition reads. “Many of the millions of people who develop long Covid have symptoms of post-recall malaise, meeting ME/CFS criteria and forbidding graded exercise therapy.”
Petition update Posted on December 18th description:
Sadly, I’m not surprised that Cochrane declined the promise of a new updated review while placing the 2019 review. They have clearly been influenced by some of their leaders who are well known for supporting the psychotic view of ME/CFS. The prospect of new Cochrane reviews makes the removal of Harmful 2019 reviews even more important.
Guidelines published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Please also state Exercise therapy is not a cure for I/CFS, and exercise routines for healthy people can be harmful to patients with the condition.
According to Edwards, the common experience of ME/CFS patients is that exercise therapy also doesn’t work. “Not only do they not work, they seem to confuse people terribly and make things worse,” he said. “It’s not clear why that should be the case, but it seems to be the case.”
Edwards said the review in question has been “widely cited and used for these purposes,” but he did not have an example of the document cited in the policy document on hand.
cochrane A spokesperson said the journal changed its editorial policy in July 2019 and will not review reviews if they are superseded by another systematic review or if the review questions are considered outdated or no longer relevant. stated that it no longer retracts the. Since 2009, Cochrane has retracted or “retracted” more than 500 reviews and their revised versions, by count in its database.
“Our Withdrawal policy We are currently addressing journal retraction policies and addressing best practices,” the spokesperson added. “co-op guidance It states that if an article contains material flaws or incorrect content or data, and its results or conclusions cannot be relied upon, retraction may be warranted. Cochrane has assessed requests to withdraw the reviews in question, but none meet the criteria for withdrawal. ”
According to Bastian, the review has “really serious problems” but does not meet the threshold for retracting a review article under the journal’s new policy.
“Many of the original cochrane “The founders are very passionate about things like exercise therapy that can be managed in general practice,” Edwards said. “There are clear indications that the easier part of Cochrane’s motivation is to reduce the hype rather than high-tech pharmaceutical intervention.”
Edwards said the review should be withdrawn. “It’s misleading and it shouldn’t be there,” he said. “It’s been around 14 years now.”
Like a retraction watch? you can make a Tax-deductible contribution to support our workfollow us x Or blue ski like us on facebookplease add us to your RSS readeror subscribe to us daily digestion. If a retraction is found not in databaseyou can Let us know here. For comments or feedback, please email us [email protected].
process…
success! you are on the list.
Oops! An error occurred and your subscription could not be processed. Please reload the page and try again.
