Jason, Leonard A, Sunnquist, Madison, Kot, Bobby et al. · Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015 · DOI
Researchers studied a new proposed name and definition for ME/CFS called SEID (Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease). They found that the new definition was much looser than the old one and incorrectly labeled people with depression and other illnesses as having SEID when they didn't actually have ME/CFS. This means the new definition could overestimate how many people have ME/CFS.
This study is critical because diagnostic criteria directly impact who receives a diagnosis and what treatments they pursue. If ME/CFS criteria are too broad, patients with other treatable conditions like depression may be misdiagnosed, delaying appropriate treatment. Accurate criteria also ensure research enrolls the right populations, making study findings more meaningful for actual ME/CFS patients.
This study does not prove that the SEID criteria are definitively wrong or should never be used—it identifies a problem that requires further refinement. It also does not establish whether removing exclusions might capture previously undiagnosed ME/CFS cases; it only shows that other illnesses are being captured as well. The study is observational and cannot determine the optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity.
About the PEM badge: “PEM required” means post-exertional malaise was an explicit required diagnostic criterion for participant inclusion in this study — not that PEM was studied, observed, or discussed. Studies using criteria that do not require PEM (e.g. Fukuda, Oxford) are tagged “PEM not required”. How the atlas works →
Contribute
Private, reviewed by a human. Not a public comment thread.