Correspondence: When an article is eligible for submission of
Correspondence, a link to the response form is available within the full-text
article. You must be a
current subscriber who has activated the online portion of your subscription
in order to send a Correspondence. Any reader can read published
Correspondence.
Correspondence to:
-
- ARTICLES:
M. K. Sharief, J. Priddin, R. S. Delamont, C. Unwin, M. R. Rose, A. David, and S. Wessely
- Neurophysiologic analysis of neuromuscular symptoms in UK Gulf War veterans: A controlled study
Neurology 2002; 59: 1518-1525
[Abstract]
[Full text]
[PDF]
|
|
Correspondence published:
-
Neurophysiologic analysis of neuromuscular symptoms in UK Gulf War veterans: A controlled study
- Vance A Spence
(9 September 2003)
-
Reply to Letter to the Editor
- Michael R Rose
(9 September 2003)
|
Neurophysiologic analysis of neuromuscular symptoms in UK Gulf War veterans: A controlled study |
9 September 2003 |
|
|
Vance A Spence, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School University of Dundee Department of Medicine Vascular Diseases Research Unit Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland, United Kingdom
Send Correspondence to journal:
Re: Neurophysiologic analysis of neuromuscular symptoms in UK Gulf War veterans: A controlled study
vance.spence{at}ntlworld.com Vance A Spence
|
In the paper on neurophsyiological symptoms in Gulf War veterans,
Sharief et al. provide specific information on the selection criteria for
subjects. [1] Symptomatic servicemen were randomly selected and recruited
to the study on the basis that they had scored at least four neuromuscular
symptoms (from fatigue, joint stiffness, muscle weakness, myalgia at rest
and after exercise, sensory symptoms, and autonomic symptoms), and had, in
addition, an SF-36 score of <72.2. To understand how the figure of
<72.2 was estimated readers are referred to an accompanying reference
[2], but an examination of that reference does not reveal how this figure
was derived. It is important to have this information, however, since the
selection criteria used to define entry into the study are critical to the
study’s conclusions. It is also important for comparison with the
recruitment criteria used in other, similar studies.
Since this it is a matter of importance for our current research in
the Vascular Research Unit at the University of Dundee on Gulf War
Syndrome and related conditions, it would be very helpful if the authors
could explain in your correspondence section how this critical SF-36 score
of <72.2, used to select subjects, was calculated in their
investigation.
References:
1. Sharief MK, Priddin J, Delamont RS, Unwin C, Rose MR, David A,
Wessley S. Neurophysiologic analysis of neuromuscular symptoms in UK Gulf
War veterans. Neurology 2002;59:1518-1525.
2. Unwin C, Blatchley N, Coker W et al. Is there a Gulf War syndrome?
Lancet 1999;353:179-182.
|
|
Reply to Letter to the Editor |
9 September 2003 |
|
|
Michael R Rose, King's College Hospital Department of Neurology King's Neurosciences Centre Denmark Hill London, SE5 9RS United Kingdom
Send Correspondence to journal:
Re: Reply to Letter to the Editor
m.r.rose{at}kcl.ac.uk Michael R Rose
|
We thank Dr. Spence for drawing our attention to the fact that we
have inadvertently cited an incorrect reference in our paper. [1, 2] The
correct reference is Ismail et al. from 2002. [3] For the convenience of
readers the relevant extract from that paper is as follows;
In the absence of a clear definition of Gulf related ill health, we
used a generic measure of physical disability, the Short-Form 36 Physical
Functioning subscale (SF-36 PF), which was measured at Phase 1 as our
proxy measure for ill health. The value of the first decile of the
distribution of the SF-36 PF in the Era cohort (score =72.2) was used as
the cut-off below which we defined disability in all three cohorts. The
Era cohort was considered the most representative of the military as it
represented 80% of the UK Armed Forces. The rationale for using a generic
measure was to allow a comparison between Gulf and non-Gulf (Bosnia and
Era) veterans which would be unbiased by different distributions of
symptoms or assumptions about the nature of ill health in Gulf and non-
Gulf veterans. This definition of ill health was designed to identify
subjects whose disability was most likely to be clinically significant.
Gulf veterans who reported impaired physical functioning below the cut-off
were defined as disabled Gulf with those above the cut-off defined as non-
disabled Gulf. Bosnia and Era veterans who reported impaired physical
functioning below the cut-off were defined as disabled non-Gulf.
References:
1. Sharief MK, Priddin J, Delamont RS, et al. Neurophysiologic
analysis of neuromuscular symptoms in UK Gulf War veterans. Neurology
2002:59: 1518-1525
2. Unwin C, Blatchley N, Coker W et al. Is there a Gulf War syndrome?
Lancet 1999; 353: 179-182
3. Ismail K KK, Brugha T, Hotopf M, et al. The mental health of UK
Gulf war veterans: phase 2 of a two-phase cohort study. British Medical
Journal 2002;325:576-579.
|
Copyright © 2008 by AAN Enterprises, Inc.
| Advertisement
|