CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 134Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchLong-Term Effects of COVID-19Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rehabilitative therapies for chronic fatigue syndrome: a secondary mediation analysis of the PACE trial.

Open access
Chalder, Trudie, Goldsmith, Kimberley A, White, Peter D, Sharpe, Michael, Pickles, Andrew R·2015·The Lancet Psychiatry
DOI 10.1016/s2215-0366(14)00069-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) added to specialist medical care (SMC), or graded exercise therapy (GET) added to SMC, are more effective in reducing fatigue and improving physical function than both adaptive pacing therapy (APT) plus SMC and SMC alone for chronic fatigue syndrome. We investigate putative treatment mechanisms.Methods We did a planned secondary mediation analysis of the PACE trial comparing SMC alone or SMC plus APT with SMC plus CBT and SMC plus GET for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. 641 participants were recruited from six specialist chronic fatigue syndrome clinics in the UK National Health Service between March 18, 2005, and Nov 28, 2008. We assessed mediation using the product of coefficients method with the 12 week measure of the mediators and the 52 week measure of the outcomes. The primary outcomes were fatigue measured by the Chalder fatigue scale and physical function measured by the physical function subscale of the SF-36. We included confounder covariates and used treatment by mediator interaction terms to examine differences in mediator-outcome relations by treatment group.Findings The largest mediated effect for both CBT and GET and both primary outcomes was through fear avoidance beliefs with an effect of larger magnitude for GET (standardised effects ×10, CBT vs APT, fatigue -1.22, 95% CI -0.52 to -1.97, physical function 1.54, 0.86 to 2.31; GET vs APT, fatigue -1.86, -0.80 to -2.89, physical function 2.35, 1.35 to 3.39). Increase in exercise tolerance (6 min walk distance) was a potent mediator of the effect of GET (vs APT, fatigue -1.37, 95% CI -0.76 to -2.21, physical function 1.90, 1.10 to 2.91), but not CBT.Interpretation Our main finding was that fear avoidance beliefs were the strongest mediator for both CBT and GET. Changes in both beliefs and behaviour mediated the effects of both CBT and GET, but more so for GET. The results support a treatment model in which both beliefs and behaviour play a part in perpetuating fatigue and disability in chronic fatigue syndrome.Funding UK Medical Research Council, Department of Health for England, Scottish Chief Scientist Office, Department for Work and Pensions, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, and Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2215-0366(14)00069-8

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Clark, 2005, The role of deconditioning and therapeutic exercises in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), JMent Health, 14, 237

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–134 of 134

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chalder, T., Goldsmith, K. A., White, P. D., Sharpe, M., & Pickles, A. R.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Chalder, Trudie
ORCID
Venue
The Lancet Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
141-152
ISSN
2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s2215-0366(14)00069-8
OpenAlex
W2087736673
Cited by
134
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 17
FWCI
18.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (DRF-2011-04-061)
  • Medical Research Council
  • Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, King's College London, University of London
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
chronic fatigue syndrome, cognitive behavioral therapy, graded exercise therapy, specialist care, fear-avoidance beliefs, exercise tolerance, fatigue, physical function, therapeutic mechanisms, mediation analysis, PACE trial, disability, 6-minute walk test, Chalder Fatigue Scale, SF-36 physical function
MeSH terms
Humans, Rehabilitation, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review