Re: The Stanford Study

Jennifer wrote:
> Here's an update on the study, for anyone who's interested.
>
> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
> I'm very glad about!
>
> Each group has approx. 16 members and two moderators, who also have
> diabetes. The researchers don't get involved, they just "watch" or
> actually read as is the case.
>
> There will be weekly classes on various topics of diabetes managment.
> You'll read the course work and then there are discussion boards for
> support/questions/goals which work exactly like this newsgroup, but
> smaller. People leave posts and you can respond to them.
>
> So far everyone in my group seems nice, and it's a real cross section
> of the country, in location, gender and age. The "problems" and
> concerns people have are all things we've heard here. Some folks are
> very computer savvy, others not so much. I don't think everyone was
> recruited via the internet, which puts a nice spin on things. This
> way it includes more of those "typical" diabetics that are mentioned
> here quite often.
>
> Since it's a small personal group, I am doubting the harsh discussions
> that often occur here will pop up, but you never know.
>
> I'll keep you posted.
>
> Jennifer
How long did all this take?

I'm losing track of time... I heard from Stanford almost immediately,
but I think it's been a week and a half since I sent my home Blood Panel
in the mail, and I haven't heard back yet...

hmm...

mt

--
T2 dx May 2005 with A1c 10.1
1000 mg Metformin 2x day
1000 mg Fish Oil (Omega 3) 2x day
500 mg Niacin 1x day
last A1c: 5.7

On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 16:54:53 -0400, Michael wrote
(in message <eg93iu$p5t$1@az33news01.freescale.net>):

> Jennifer wrote:
>> Here's an update on the study, for anyone who's interested.
>>
>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>> I'm very glad about!
>>
>> Each group has approx. 16 members and two moderators, who also have
>> diabetes. The researchers don't get involved, they just "watch" or
>> actually read as is the case.
>>
>> There will be weekly classes on various topics of diabetes managment.
>> You'll read the course work and then there are discussion boards for
>> support/questions/goals which work exactly like this newsgroup, but
>> smaller. People leave posts and you can respond to them.
>>
>> So far everyone in my group seems nice, and it's a real cross section
>> of the country, in location, gender and age. The "problems" and
>> concerns people have are all things we've heard here. Some folks are
>> very computer savvy, others not so much. I don't think everyone was
>> recruited via the internet, which puts a nice spin on things. This
>> way it includes more of those "typical" diabetics that are mentioned
>> here quite often.
>>
>> Since it's a small personal group, I am doubting the harsh discussions
>> that often occur here will pop up, but you never know.
>>
>> I'll keep you posted.
>>
>> Jennifer
> How long did all this take?
>
> I'm losing track of time... I heard from Stanford almost immediately,
> but I think it's been a week and a half since I sent my home Blood Panel
> in the mail, and I haven't heard back yet...
>
> hmm...

same here, Michael. I mailed my blood panel in
almost two weeks ago.

T

> mt
>
>

Michael wrote:

> How long did all this take?
>
> I'm losing track of time... I heard from Stanford almost immediately,
> but I think it's been a week and a half since I sent my home Blood Panel
> in the mail, and I haven't heard back yet...
>
> hmm...
>
> mt

I took my blood test on 9/14... and mailed it in the next day. I got an
email from them on the 29th saying I was in a group that would start the
next week... I also got a book in the mail.

So maybe you can figure yours out from that.


Jennifer

This post not CC'd by email
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
<micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:

>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>> I'm very glad about!

G'day G'day Michael,

I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.

Best wishes,
--
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin

It's not even a single blind study


"Quentin Grady" <quentin@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:eaogi21ctg5qq8h2t9it7c00ktgdbkmdu7@4ax.com...
> This post not CC'd by email
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
> <micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>
>>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>>> I'm very glad about!
>
> G'day G'day Michael,
>
> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>
> Best wishes,
> --
> Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
> New Zealand, >#,#< [
> / \ /\
> "... and the blind dog was leading."
>
> http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin

Quentin Grady <quentin@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> This post not CC'd by email
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
> <micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:

>>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>>> I'm very glad about!

> G'day G'day Michael,

> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.

Not only not double blinded, but not even single blinded. They must be
expecting some impressive results!

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

On 8 Oct 2006 08:27:13 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk>
wrote:

>Quentin Grady <quentin@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>> This post not CC'd by email
>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
>> <micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>>>> I'm very glad about!
>
>> G'day G'day Michael,
>
>> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>
>Not only not double blinded, but not even single blinded. They must be
>expecting some impressive results!

Will the results be of any use and have any validity? Rosenberg is
always bitching about useless studies.
_____________________________________
http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free

Well...

Since the study is to see whether or not an online diabetic mangment
course will aid in diabetic control... there's no way to do a blind study.

Either you're taking the course or you're not. You'd know ; )

Jennifer



Quentin Grady wrote:

> This post not CC'd by email
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
> <micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>>>I'm very glad about!
>
>
> G'day G'day Michael,
>
> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>
> Best wishes,

Chris Malcolm wrote:

> Quentin Grady <quentin@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>This post not CC'd by email
>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
>><micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>>>>I'm very glad about!
>
>
>>G'day G'day Michael,
>
>
>> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>
>
> Not only not double blinded, but not even single blinded. They must be
> expecting some impressive results!


It's not a drug study.

It's a study to see if taking an online diabetes managemtent course will
aid in diabetic control.

So you'd have to know if you were taking the course or not.

Jennifer

So, since we know at least one A.S.D'er who is NOT taking the class
(he's in the control group), and at least two who ARE taking the class,
then you who are in the class shouldn't be sharing...should you?

mt

Jennifer wrote:
> Well...
>
> Since the study is to see whether or not an online diabetic mangment
> course will aid in diabetic control... there's no way to do a blind
> study.
>
> Either you're taking the course or you're not. You'd know ; )
>
> Jennifer
>
>
>
> Quentin Grady wrote:
>
>> This post not CC'd by email
>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
>> <micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control.
>>>> Which I'm very glad about!
>>
>>
>> G'day G'day Michael,
>> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>> Best wishes,
>


--
T2 dx May 2005 with A1c 10.1
1000 mg Metformin 2x day
1000 mg Fish Oil (Omega 3) 2x day
500 mg Niacin 1x day
last A1c: 5.7

I haven't shared any of the course material... just how the course is
being conducted.

Jennifer


Michael wrote:

> So, since we know at least one A.S.D'er who is NOT taking the class
> (he's in the control group), and at least two who ARE taking the class,
> then you who are in the class shouldn't be sharing...should you?
>
> mt
>
> Jennifer wrote:
>
>> Well...
>>
>> Since the study is to see whether or not an online diabetic mangment
>> course will aid in diabetic control... there's no way to do a blind
>> study.
>>
>> Either you're taking the course or you're not. You'd know ; )
>>
>> Jennifer
>>
>>
>>
>> Quentin Grady wrote:
>>
>>> This post not CC'd by email
>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
>>> <micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control.
>>>>> Which I'm very glad about!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> G'day G'day Michael,
>>> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>
>

Jennifer <jenniferNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Chris Malcolm wrote:
>> Quentin Grady <quentin@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>>
>>>This post not CC'd by email
>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 13:54:53 -0700, Michael
>>><micha8s-yahoo@please-don't-spam-me.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>I was randomly chosen to be in a study group, not the control. Which
>>>>>I'm very glad about!
>>
>>>G'day G'day Michael,
>>
>>> I guess that means it is not a double blind experiment.
>>
>> Not only not double blinded, but not even single blinded. They must be
>> expecting some impressive results!

> It's not a drug study.

> It's a study to see if taking an online diabetes managemtent course will
> aid in diabetic control.

I doubt that the purpose of the study is to see if taking *any*
diabetics management course will help, including silly ones. They
presumably have a specific course in mind which they have designed to
be useful. Note that there is oodles of evidence that just paying
friendly attention to a population improves their health. All you need
to do is take a blood test and chat to them once a week and they'll
improve over controls whom you simply ignore.

So if you're putting some folk on a course of education, and giving
others nothing, you have to get results which are substantially higher
than the known effects of just giving some supposedly helpful
attention to one group. The simple morale boost of feeling that
someone cares has an effect on its own.

> So you'd have to know if you were taking the course or not.

So you use two courses, one of which you hope will work, and one of
which you've specifically designed so that it won't, and have three
groups, the third of whom gets no course. For example, one course
might use pre-prandial testing, the other post-prandial.

I'm not suggesting that such a regime would actually solve the
specific control problems this trial has, because I don't know the
details or the purposes. I'm just pointing out that there are well
known ways of getting round this kind of problem.

It's quite possible that all this is irrelevant to the study in
question. For example, they might have got a bit of diabetic
educational funding from a source which says they'll get a lot more if
they do this study and find a positive outcome, no special controls
needed.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]