TY - JOUR
T1 - Results of the PACE follow-up study are uninterpretable
AU - Coyne, James Charles
AU - Laws, Keith R
N1 - Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/2/1
Y1 - 2016/2/1
N2 - The PACE follow-up study1 is something of a curate's egg, admirable in ambition, but interpretatively indigestible. Although the PACE programme of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or graded exercise therapy (GET) led patients to report less fatigue or greater physical function than patients in the adaptive pacing therapy and specialist medical care groups in the short term, evidence in the long-term follow-up is unconvincing. The lack of between-group differences at follow-up takes precedence over within-group differences, which are inflated by attribution of any change associated with non-specific factors to the specific interventions.
AB - The PACE follow-up study1 is something of a curate's egg, admirable in ambition, but interpretatively indigestible. Although the PACE programme of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or graded exercise therapy (GET) led patients to report less fatigue or greater physical function than patients in the adaptive pacing therapy and specialist medical care groups in the short term, evidence in the long-term follow-up is unconvincing. The lack of between-group differences at follow-up takes precedence over within-group differences, which are inflated by attribution of any change associated with non-specific factors to the specific interventions.
UR - http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(15)00551-9/fulltext
U2 - 10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00551-9
DO - 10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00551-9
M3 - Article
C2 - 26795757
SN - 2215-0366
VL - 3
SP - e6-e7
JO - The Lancet Psychiatry
JF - The Lancet Psychiatry
IS - 2
ER -