virology blog
About viruses and viral disease
By David Tuller, DrPH
I recently reported that seven papers from Professor Esther Crawley, Bristol University’s methodologically and ethically challenged pediatrician and grant magnet, do not appear to have been corrected, as requested almost three years ago by a report of an investigation into her work. The investigation was commissioned by Bristol along with the UK’s Health Research Authority, which overseas ethics concerns.
by David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH
In 2019, a report from the University of Bristol and the UK’s Health Research Authority recommended corrections to the ethics statements of eleven studies. Professor Esther Crawley, Bristol’s ethically and methodologically challenged star researcher and grant magnet, was the main author and/or principal investigator of all eleven papers. In a post yesterday, I disclosed that only four of the eleven appear to have been corrected.
by David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH
A few years ago, a valued source alerted me to a strange quirk in the work of pediatrician Esther Crawley, Bristol University’s methodologically and ethically challenged star researcher and grant magnet. Not all tips are reliable, but this one definitely was. As it turned out, Professor Crawley had–based on a single 2007 letter from a local research ethics committee (REC)– exempted a whole batch of separate studies from ethical review. (I first reported on this peculiar situation in November, 2018.)
by David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH
I recently noted that BMJ Paediatrics Open did not publish the peer review history of a 2021 study from a team led by Professor Esther Crawley, Bristol University’s methodologically and ethically challenged pediatrician and grant magnet. The study (Clery et al) was titled “Qualitative study of the acceptability and feasibility of acceptance and commitment therapy for adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome.”
BMJ Paediatrics Open, like many so-called “open” journals, highlights its “open peer review” process. Here’s a statement from the journal’s website:
by David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH
Yesterday, I wrote a blog about a just-published but already out-dated conference abstract from a team led by Professor Esther Crawley, Bristol University’s methodologically and ethically challenged pediatrician and grant magnet. After I tweeted about it, I heard from Naomi Harvey, a zoologist, who said she’d written to BJPsychOpen about the abstract’s flaws. Hopefully, she—and any others who alerted the journal–will receive an adequate response.
My exchange with Dr Harvey prompted me to look again at the 2021 study (Clery et al) from which the conference abstract seems to have been drawn. Clery et al, published by BMJ Paediatrics Open, was called “Qualitative study of the acceptability and feasibility of acceptance and commitment therapy for adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome.” (BMJ Paediatrics Open describes itself as “an official journal of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.” Just to be clear; the RCPCH is a trade union that, like any trade union, promotes and protects the financial, political and professional interests of its members.)
by David Tuller
By David Tuller, DrPH
What is going on with Professor Esther Crawley, Bristol University’s methodologically and ethically challenged pediatrician and grant magnet? And why is she still disseminating misguided views about treatments for vulnerable children? Haven’t kids suffered enough from the discredited claims of the GET/CBT ideological brigades?
Just last week, the East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust responded immediately to an appeal from the ME Association about its potentially harmful guidance on graded exercise therapy for ME/CFS, as I wrote about here. With profuse apologies, the trust removed the offending document. But Professor Crawley seems to be heading in the other direction. She and colleagues have just published a conference abstract that was out-of-date the moment it appeared.