SynthesisInternational journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being2020
Patients' experiences and effects of non-pharmacological treatment for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome - a scoping mixed methods review.
Synthesis in International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent research in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: an evidence map.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of traditional Chinese mind-body exercises for patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of global health · 2023Pooled it
- The evidence base for physiotherapy in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome when considering post-exertional malaise: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.Journal of translational medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Review
- A Short-Term Pacing Intervention in People with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Pilot Study in Portugal.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Gulf War Illness, Fibromyalgia, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Long COVID Overlap in Common Symptoms and Underlying Biological Mechanisms: Implications for Future Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Chronic inflammatory response syndrome: a review of the evidence of clinical efficacy of treatment.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Focus on post-exertional malaise when approaching ME/CFS in specialist healthcare improves satisfaction and reduces deterioration.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe EU COST Action 15111 collaboration on myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) aims to assess current research and identify knowledge gaps in Europe. Presently, our purpose is to map the effects of non-pharmacological therapies (NPTs) for ME/CFS, and what patients find important in the treatment process.
methodsA scoping mixed methods literature review of European studies identified 16 papers fulfiling our inclusion criteria. The quantitative and qualitative studies were synthesized separately in tables. Additionally, extracts from the qualitative studies were subjected to translational analysis.
resultsEffect studies addressed cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT, n = 4), multimodal rehabilitation (n = 2) and activity-pacing (n = 2). CBT reduced fatigue scores more than usual care or waiting list controls. The effects of rehabilitation and activity-pacing were inconsistent. The contents, assessment methods and effects of rehabilitation and activity pacing studies varied. For patients, health professionals' recognition of ME/CFS and support were crucial, but they expressed ambiguous experiences of what the NPTs entail.
conclusionsMethodological differences make comparisons across NPTs impossible, and from a patient perspective the relevance of the specific contents of NPTs are unclear. Future well-designed studies should focus on developing NPTs tailored to patients' concerns and evaluation tools reflecting what is essential for patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.