Talk:Pediatric myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome

People with pediatric ME/CFS
All the examples are very severely ill people who died or didn't recover, which is not typical. Examples of some who are less severely affected, and perhaps a graph on severity would make this page far less depressing (and more accurate) notjusttired (talk) 14:43, 17 February 2019 (EST)

Not child friendly
MEpedia's main audience won't be children but it would be nice to have a bit more visual appeal on this page, as well as breaking up any large chunks of text for easy reading.

Is it worth having a page on ME/CFS aimed at young people? I've noticed that the Tymes Trust has done useful leaflets, perhaps a one page primer? notjusttired (talk) 14:43, 17 February 2019 (EST)

Adding videos and images
I think this would help readability and appeal to younger people reading. It may be worth setting up a YouTube Playlist on MEAction's YouTube channel about this. Some millions missing photos involving children or their shoes too. Is consent needed for children's photos if they are not identified by name? notjusttired (talk) 14:43, 17 February 2019 (EST)

Avoid referencing MEpedia itself
Please link to the relevant page instead of using a reference (eg for those with ME), or visit the page and find copy the reference used instead. MEpedia should try and avoid referencing itself, especially because it then becomes difficult to find where the original info came from if it's factual. notjusttired (talk) 14:43, 17 February 2019 (EST)

Rimes study
Not cited in page, is it Rimes 2007? Issues with prevalence by Rimes described in Jason et al (2015)
 * 2015, Issues in Estimating Rates of Pediatric Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis in a Community-based Samplehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5336218/ (Full text)

"One problem with population based efforts (e.g., Rimes et al., 2007) is that the small number of identified patients with CFS resulted in very wide confidence intervals around the prevalence estimates. For example, in the Rimes et al. (2007) study of British general practitioners, the point prevalence of pediatric CFS was 0.5%, but the 95% confidence interval around this ranged from 0.01 to 0.9, which would result in estimates of anywhere between 10 and 900 per 100,000. Thus, the true prevalence rate is unclear. Also, physician samples tend to be biased, generally under- estimating the true prevalence rate." notjusttired (talk) 06:46, 25 February 2019 (EST)