Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37648439›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry2024

Long-term effectiveness of a cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in the management of fatigue in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, controlled trial versus standard care.

Marie Claire Gay, Fanny Cassedanne, Frederic Barbot, Isabelle Vaugier, Sarah Thomas, Eric Manchon, Djamel Bensmail, Marie Blanchere, Olivier Heinzlef

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03758820 (Multicenter Study, Randomized, Parallel Group Controlled, Testing the Effectiveness of a Behavioral Cognitive Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03758820 nacompletednot on this map

Multicenter Study, Randomized, Parallel Group Controlled, Testing the Effectiveness of a Behavioral Cognitive Therapy (BCT) vs Usual Local Practice on the Fatigue of Patients With Relapsing Remittent Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS)

TypeinterventionalSponsorRéseau Sep Idf OuestRan2017 to 2020Enrolled105ConditionsRelapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis, Fatigue, Cognitive TherapyArmsBehavorial Cognitive Therapy (BCT)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Network Localization of Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Linking Pathogenesis to Fall Risk in Multiple Sclerosis.Archives of internal medicine research · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Marie Claire GayPsychology UR CLIPSYD 4430, Paris-Nanterre University, Nanterre, France.
Fanny CassedanneRéseau SEP IDF Ouest, Le Vesinet, France.
Frederic BarbotInserm CIC 1429, APHP, Hôpital Raymond-Poincare, Garches, France.
Isabelle VaugierInserm CIC 1429, APHP, Hôpital Raymond-Poincare, Garches, France.
Sarah ThomasClinical Research Unit, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset, UK.
Eric ManchonNeurologie, Centre Hospitalier de Gonesse, Gonesse, France.
Djamel BensmailService de Médecine Physique et de Réadaptation, Hôpital Raymond-Poincare, APHP, Garches, France.
Marie BlanchereCRC SEP IDF Ouest, Poissy-Garches, France.
Olivier HeinzlefCRC SEP IDF Ouest, Poissy-Garches, France olivier.heinzlef@ght-yvelinesnord.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-4634-8542

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFatigue is a disabling symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS). The lack of effective therapeutics has promoted the development of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based fatigue management programmes. However, their efficacy does not sustain over time. We proposed to test the long-term effectiveness of a 6-week fatigue programme supplemented with four booster sessions ('FACETS+') in patients with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) and fatigue.

methodsThis multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, parallel-group trial versus standard care enrolled patients with RRMS and fatigue. Participants were randomised to either FACETS+ plus standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome measure was fatigue impact (Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) at 12 months) based on intention-to-treat analyses.

resultsFrom May 2017 to September 2020, 162 patients were screened; 105 were randomly assigned to FACETS+ (n=57) or standard care (n=48) and 88 completed the primary outcome assessment for the MFIS. At month 12, participants showed improved MFIS compared with baseline in the intervention group (mean difference (MD)=14.0 points; (95% CI 6.45 to 21.5)) and the control group (MD=6.1 points; (95% CI -0.30 to 12.5)) with a significant between-group difference in favour of the intervention group (adjusted MD=7.89 points; (95% CI 1.26 to 14.52), standardised effect size=0.52, p=0.021). No trial-related serious adverse events were reported.

conclusionsA 6-week CBT-based programme with four booster sessions is superior to standard care alone to treat MS-related fatigue in the long term (12 months follow-up). The results support the use of the FACETS+ programme for the treatment of MS-related fatigue. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03758820.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyMultiple SclerosisMultiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-RemittingFatigueHumansOutcome Assessment, Health Carecognitive neuropsychologymultiple sclerosispsychologyrandomised trials

Identifiers

PMID37648439
PMCPMC10850683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.