In fact, there was no difference between groups at 2.5 year follow up. So there was no benefit from CBT or GET.
Conversation
Replying to
Replying to
Interesting that he didn't correct you. But the 'null' results would be clear to any independent academic.
3
Replying to
I quote the paper itself: "There was little evidence of differences in outcomes between the...groups at long-term follow-up."
3
Replying to
So, you see, patients get sick to death of this persistent misrepresentation that we are supposed to be grateful for.
5
Replying to
If patients are persistently told that GET is good for them, but the research shows null results, should we not protest?
7
Replying to
If Sharpe OK'ed your statement that CBT performed better than SMC, then I think you should protest vociferously!
2
6
Replying to
Isabel, have u seen the prestigious IoM report? Commissioned by US govt. Agrees with patients:
iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports/2015/M
3
Replying to
All these issues are far too complex to tweet about. Would be happy to chat at any time.
1
Show replies