2019 or 2024?

The observant among you will have noticed that we are now calling for the Cochrane 2019/2024 review (rather than the 2019 review) to be withdrawn. The reason for the change is astonishing.

Back in 2019, the Cochrane Editor-in-Chief Dr Karla Soares-Weiser published the Larun et al review, but noted that, even after a series of amendments, it was
"still based on a research question and a set of methods from 2002, and reflects evidence from studies that applied definitions of ME/CFS from the 1990s". She noted that Cochrane had decided that "a new approach to the publication of evidence in this area is needed" and announced the new review development process on this "globally important health topic". Since then, a global pandemic has resulted in a huge increase in the number of people meeting ME/CFS diagnostic criteria, surely making it an even more important topic.

As we reported in the last update, Cochrane announced that that replacement review that has been in the works for some five years would now not go ahead. The carefully selected writing team finished a protocol nearly two years ago and delivered it to Cochrane for approval. The carefully selected Independent Advisory Group was poised to provide comments on the protocol, but was never given it. Cochrane abandoned the new review process, citing "insufficient new research in the field" and "a lack of resources to oversee the work". We'll have a closer look at those reasons in the next update.

On 19 December 2024 Cochrane added a new editorial note to the 2019 review, informing readers that
" Cochrane is ceasing the production of a full update of this Cochrane review. A pilot project for engaging interest holders in the development of this Cochrane review was initiated on 2 October 2019 (see Editorial Note below) and has now been disbanded. Cochrane maintains its decision to publish this Cochrane review in 2019."

To be clear, the 2019 review has not been changed, it has not been updated.

The only things that have changed about the 2019 review are the addition of that editorial note about the abandonment of the new review process...
... and the citation for the 2019 review.
"Larun L, Brurberg KG, Odgaard-Jensen J, Price JR. Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2024"
Yes, it is now a review with a 2024 publication date. It is not yet clear if the 2024 citation date is just an error, or if it was done deliberately. If an error, we expect that the incorrect date will be swiftly corrected.

The effect of a 2024 publication date is to make the review seem much more relevant than it otherwise would. The unchanged 2019 review now appears from the citation to be a fresh new up-to-date review, and indeed it has been shared on social media, probably mistakenly, as a new review. Uninformed readers will assume that it represents a distillation of the latest knowledge using the best methods, and that criticisms of the 2019 version have been fully addressed. The review, with its 2024 date, appears newer than the 2021 NICE Guidelines and Evidence Review which unequivocally warned that people with ME/CFS should not be treated Graded Exercise Therapy.

A 2024 publication date is particularly misleading as the 2019 version of the review was actually the result of a series of amendments over several years. The literature search was undertaken in 2014 and so the review contains no source material more recent than the 2011 PACE study report.

Surely this situation where an unchanged review is relabelled with a publication date 5 years after the actual publication date is preposterous and will not be allowed to stand?

Our best wishes to the supporters of this campaign
As a new year approaches, we thank you for your support and hope that 2025 brings better health, much happiness and exciting new developments in the understanding of ME/CFS.