Anonymous
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Search
Editing
Retractions, corrections and expressions of concern in chronic fatigue syndrome research
(section)
From MEpedia, a crowd-sourced encyclopedia of ME and CFS science and history
Namespaces
Page
Discussion
More
More
Page actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
History
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Reasons for retractions and corrections == In ME/CFS research reasons have included: * scientific criticism of methodology * incorrect or missing mentions of the fact that primary outcomes had been swapped for pre-registered trials, particularly when objective primary outcomes were swapped for questionnaire results in non-blinded trials. * the merging of feasibility study data with trial data giving incorrect timeliness, and potentially biased results * scientific challenge of the conclusions, for example interpretation of the data * ethics approval concerns or incorrect ethics statements * lack of compliance to journal policies (e.g., data sharing or pre-registration of clinical trials) * lack of adherence to scientific standards * incorrect use of scientific assessment tools, e.g., reviews incorrectly using the GRADE framework to assess the risk of bias or other factors * also significant has been the inclusion or exclusion of patients using the [[Oxford criteria]], or the exclusion of patients with [[severe and very severe ME]], which affect whether results can be considered representative of all patients or may reflect patients with chronic fatigue not caused by chronic fatigue syndrome. Other publications have faced widespread calls for retraction or independent re-analysis of the data, but have not been retracted, for example the main [[PACE trial]] publication. Patient petitions, and pressure from patient groups without scientific criticism have not led to the cancellation of planned research, or to retractions or corrections, although some patient groups have signed open letters of scientific criticism by scientists or published their own scientific criticism.
Summary:
Please make sure your edits are consistent with
MEpedia's guidelines
.
By saving changes, you agree to the
Terms of use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 3.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
This page is a member of 4 hidden categories:
Category:All articles with unsourced statements
Category:All stub articles
Category:Articles with unsourced statements from 2020
Category:Stub pages last edited in 2023
Navigation
Navigation
Skip to content
Main page
Browse
Become an editor
Random page
Popular pages
Abbreviations
Glossary
About MEpedia
Links for editors
Contents
Guidelines
Recent changes
Pages in need
Search
Help
Wiki tools
Wiki tools
Special pages
Page tools
Page tools
User page tools
More
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Page logs