Journal of Health Psychology, Special Issue: The PACE Trial

Special Issue:The PACE Trial

The Journal of Health Psychology released a special issue in August 2017, volume 22, issue 9, devoted entirely to the controversial PACE Trial.

Contents

Editorials

• Special issue on the PACE Trial by David F. Marks (First published July 31, 2017)
• ‘PACE-Gate’: When clinical trial evidence meets open data access by Keith J Geraghty (First published November 1, 2016)

Open peer commentary article

• Response to the editorial by Dr Geraghty by Peter D White, Trudie Chalder, Michael Sharpe, Brian J Angus, Hannah L Baber, Jessica Bavinton, Mary Burgess, Lucy V Clark, Diane L Cox, Julia C DeCesare, Kimberley A Goldsmith, Anthony L Johnson, Paul McCrone, Gabrielle Murphy, Maurice Murphy, Hazel O'Dowd, Laura Potts, Rebecca Walwyn, David Wilks (First published January 24, 2017)

Commentaries

• Once again, the PACE authors respond to concerns with empty answers by David Tuller (First published April 27, 2017)
• Investigator bias and the PACE trial by Steven Lubet (First published March 7, 2017)
• The problem of bias in behavioural intervention studies: Lessons from the PACE trial by Carolyn Wilshire (First published March 23, 2017)
• PACE trial authors continue to ignore their own null effect by Mark Vink (First published April 27, 2017)
• The PACE trial missteps on pacing and patient selection by Leonard A Jason (First published February 1, 2017)
• Do graded activity therapies cause harm in chronic fatigue syndrome? by Tom Kindlon (First published March 20, 2017)
• PACE team response shows a disregard for the principles of science by Jonathan Edwards (First published March 28, 2017)
• Bias, misleading information and lack of respect for alternative views have distorted perceptions of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome and its treatment by Ellen Goudsmit and Sandra Howes (First published May 29, 2017)
• PACE investigators’ response is misleading regarding patient survey results by Karen D Kirke (First published May 11, 2017)
• Distress signals: Does cognitive behavioural therapy reduce or increase distress in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis? by Keith R Laws by First published May 17, 2017
• Cognitive behaviour therapy and objective assessments in chronic fatigue syndrome by Graham McPhee (First published June 19, 2017)
• PACE trial claims for recovery in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome – true or false? It’s time for an independent review of the methodology and results by Charles Bernard Shepherd (First published April 9, 2017)
• PACE-GATE: An alternative view on a study with a poor trial protocol by Bart Stouten (First published May 12, 2017)
• The PACE trial: It’s time to broaden perceptions and move on by Keith J Petrie and John Weinman (First Published April 10, 2017
• Defense of the PACE trial is based on argumentation fallacies by Steven Lubet (First published June 14, 2017)
• Chronic fatigue syndrome patients have no reason to accept the PACE trial results: Response to Keith J Petrie and John Weinman by Susanna Agardy (First published June 27, 2017)
• Further commentary on the PACE trial: Biased methods and unreliable outcomes by Keith J Geraghty (First published June 14, 2017)

See also

• Intimidation and bullying of PACE trial critics

• PACE trial

PACE trial A controversial study which claimed that CBT and GET were effective in treating "CFS/ME", despite the fact that its own data did not support this conclusion. Its results and methodology were widely disputed by patients, scientists, and the peer-reviewed scientific literature.