There has been a great deal of confusion about the CFSAC webinar meeting and how to access it.
(Contrary to what was previously said by HHS) Registration IS NOT required for viewing it.
HHS’ most recent information on viewing the webinar is:
Webinar Information
The Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee (CFSAC) Webinar will be a “virtual meeting” using Adobe Connect Pro, a web conferencing product that allows users to conduct live meetings and presentations over the internet. In order to view and listen to the proceedings during the CFSAC webinar participants will need to access the webinar using the information below:
Webinar Access:
Adobe Connect URL: http://hhs.adobeconnect.com/owhcfsac/
Access to the Audio Portion of the Webinar:
Conference Call Number: 877-918-6627 | Passcode: 4429527
Using Adobe Connect requires that you have an Internet connection, a Web browser, the latest version of the Adobe Connect Add-in to attend a Web conference. Adobe Connect Pro is supported by many operating systems, including Windows, Macintosh, Linux, and Solaris as well as the most widely used browsers, including Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Safari.
It is recommended that you test your computer prior to attending a meeting. You can do this by going to http://admin.adobeconnect.com/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm.
This diagnostic test will ensure your computer and network connections are properly configured to provide you with the best possible Adobe Connect meeting experience. The diagnostic test checks for the following:
-
Clear connection to Adobe Connect
-
Bandwidth availability
-
Latest Adobe Connect Add-in
If the diagnostic check finds that you do not have the latest Adobe Connect Add-in installed on your computer (as seen below) please click on the “Install Add-in” link on your computer as circled in the picture below. Please note that you will not be able to view the webinar if the latest Adobe Connect Add-in is not installed.
Once the Add-in is installed, click on the link http://hhs.adobeconnect.com/owhcfsac/ to join the webinar. You should see the screen below.
Click the button to “Enter as a Guest” and type your name (if you choose to be identified) and click the “Enter Room” button. You will be directed to the CFSAC webinar.
If you have technical difficulty during the webinar, please contact Seamon Corporation at 301-658-3442 or CFSACDec2013@seamoncorporation.com.
The webinar will be archived on the HHS CFSAC Web site at http://www.hhs.gov/advocomcfs.
Additional “How to use” resources for Adobe Connect
If you have never used Adobe Connect, please click on the following link to get a quick overview: http://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview.
The Visual Quick Start Guide provides basic information for participating in an Adobe Connect Webinar. Please click the following link to view the Visual Quick Start Guide: http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/adobeconnect/pdfs/VQS_Guide_for_Participants.pdf
http://blsmeetings.net/CFSACdec2013/webinarinformation.cfm
Comments on Evidence Review due Oct 20th
Published October 16, 2014 Uncategorized Leave a CommentTags: advocacy, definitions, ME, NIH, public comment, Review Comments Preview, upcoming events
Evidence Review Comments Preview
This post comes via Mary Dimmock, Claudia Goodell, Denise Lopez-Majano, and myself. You are welcome to publish it on your site with attribution and a link back to this post. You are also welcome to use this (and other material gathered here ) as a framework for your own comments on the draft evidence review – due October 20th.
It’s been a challenging few weeks, digesting and analyzing the AHRQ Draft Systematic Evidence Review on Diagnosis and Treatment of ME/CFS. We continue to be deeply concerned about the many flaws in the review, in terms of both the approach it took and how it applied the study protocol.
Our comments on the Review will reflect our significant concerns about how the Evidence Review was conducted, the diagnostic, subgroup, and harms treatment conclusions drawn by this report, and the risk of undue harm that this report creates for patients with ME. We believe a final version should not be published until these scientific issues are resolved.
Most fundamentally, the Evidence Review is grounded in the flawed assumption that eight CFS and ME definitions all represent the same group of patients that are appropriately studied and treated as a single entity or group of closely related entities. Guided by that assumption, this Evidence Review draws conclusions on subgroups, diagnostics, treatments and harms for all CFS and ME patients based on studies done in any of these eight definitions. In doing so, the Evidence Review disregards its own concerns, as well as the substantial body of evidence that these definitions do not all represent the same disease and that the ME definitions are associated with distinguishing biological pathologies. It is unscientific, illogical and risky to lump disparate patients together without regard to substantive differences in their underlying conditions.
Compounding this flawed assumption are the a priori choices in the Review Protocol that focused on a more narrow set of questions than originally planned and that applied restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria. As a result, evidence that would have refuted the flawed starting assumption or that was required to accurately answer the questions was never considered. Some examples of how these assumptions and protocol choices negatively impacted this Evidence Review include:
The issues with this Evidence Review are substantial in number, magnitude and extent. At its root is the assumption that any case definition is as good as the rest, and that studies done on one patient population are applicable to every other patient population, despite the significant and objective differences among these patients. The failure to differentiate between patients with the symptom of subjective unexplained fatigue on the one hand, and objective immunological, neurological and metabolic dysfunction on the other, calls into question the entire Evidence Review and all conclusions made about diagnostic methods, the nature of this disease and its subgroups, the benefits and harms of treatment, and the future directions for research.
As the Evidence Review states, the final version of this report may be used in the development of clinical practice guidelines or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. It will also be used in the P2P Workshop and in driving NIH’s research strategy. Given the likelihood of those uses and the Evidence Review’s claim of broad applicability to all CFS and ME patients, the flaws within this report create an undue risk of significant harm to patients with ME and will likely confound research for years to come. These issues must be addressed before this Evidence Review is issued in its final form.
Share this: