Tag: correction
-
Letter to Journal about Inflated Claims of FND Prevalence
I have spent some time trying to correct the record on the reported prevalence of functional neurological disorder (FND). As I have documented, leaders of the FND field have spent the last decade misrepresenting the findings of a seminal 2010 study, Stone et al, to claim that this diagnosis is the second-most-common presentation at outpatient…
-
FND Experts Agree To Correct Inflated Prevalence Claim
For years, experts in functional neurological disorder (FND) have cited a seminal study in their field to claim that the diagnosis was the second-most-common presentation at outpatient neurology clinics, with a prevalence of 16%. This claim was, and is, categorically untrue. The Scottish Neurological Symptoms Study (SNSS), which yielded multiple papers about a dozen years…
-
Neurology Journal Fixes False Claim in MUS Paper–But Fails to Publish a Correction Notice (Ironically, I Have Added a Correction to the Post!)
UPDATE: August 4, 2021 Dr Villemarette-Pittman, the managing editor of Journal of the Neurological Sciences, has informed me that she has learned from Elsevier that a corrigendum has in fact been written and will be published in the near future. She also informed me that she plays no role in deciding on or setting policy…
-
Professor White & Colleagues “Regret” Ignoring Null Results in GETSET Trial Follow-Up
Last week, I wrote about the correction made to the “Highlights” section of the paper reporting the long-term follow-up results for the GETSET trial. (The trial was conducted by Professor Peter White, one of the three lead PACE investigators, and colleagues.) I noted that this correction was not indicated or identified—a fact I attributed to…