Quick Thoughts

Conflict of interest in manuscript peer-review: Expert opinions

Discussion of a recent court case concerning a peer reviewer who failed to disclose a conflict of interest has broader application.

Journal of Health Psychology Editor responds to misrepresentations by Cochrane author in Mental Elf blog

A Cochrane review author made a number of false claims in his Mental Elf blog post about why his manuscript about PACEgate was rejected by the Journal of Health Psychology.

Before the PACE-gate opened…

I co-wrote this with a sufferer of myalgic encephalomyelitis whom I have come to accept as a comrade in arms.

What to look for in the Special Issue of Journal of Health Psychology concerning the PACE trial

A Special issue of Journal of Health Psychology concerns PACE, a trial of therapies for patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME)/chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) that has attracted a great deal of controversy

Last ditch attempt to block publication of special issue of Journal of Health Psychology foiled

Publication of the special issue of Journal of Health Psychology will go forward as planned on Monday July 31.

PACE-Gate: The Making of a Medical Scandal

An advance look at a forthcoming Editorial for a Journal of Health Psychology Special Issue on the PACE trial-A Medical Scandal.

Misconduct in an author’s nomination of reviewers for his manuscript

An author, Kjell Gundro Brurberg  appealed the rejection of his manuscript. He was offered an opportunity to nominate additional reviewers, but to ensure they did not have conflicts of interest. What happened next…

Global expert on distant and faith healing chaired PACE Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee

Paul Dieppe, the initial Chair of Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee for the PACE trial is also renowned as a “leading global voice in the understanding and advancement of energy/ spiritual healing.”

My peer review of a PACE investigators’ article that the authors refused to heed

OK, Michael Sharpe, I get it that 400 peer reviewed publications don't qualify me as a reviewer of your paper, I am just not seasoned enough. but could you show me what you look for in a reviewer worthy of evaluating your manuscript?

NICE guidelines are discrepant with meta analyses and based on political considerations: An exchange

Are NICE guidelines often based on political considerations and discrepant with the results of meta-analyses and other best evidence?

More signs the tide is turning: Vaughan Bell in The Lancet Psychiatry on routine data sharing

The PACE trial of cognitive behaviour therapy and graded exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome has been enormously destructive of the campaign for open, more trustworthy science in the UK. With clear conflicts of interest, the investigators of one of the largest psychotherapy trials ever switched scoring of some outcomes and suppressed other outcomes altogether […]

Patients writing about their health condition were abused by a peer reviewer and silenced by The BMJ

Should patients submitting manuscripts concerning health conditions provide proof of their diagnoses, such as medical records or letters from their physicians? Should The BMJ apologize to these patients and their academic collaborator co-authors, given that no such apology has been forthcoming from the Action Editor?