Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40235945›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025

Breaking through the mind-body divide: patient priorities for interoception research.

Lydia J Hickman, Gabriel Mackie, Beth F Longley, Hannah S Savage, Emily Bagley, Hugo Fleming, Rachel Knight, Isabel Lau, Annalise Whines, Sarah N Garfinkel and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Lydia J HickmanMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Gabriel MackieMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Beth F LongleyInsitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
Hannah S SavageInsitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
Emily BagleyMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Hugo FlemingMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Rachel KnightMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Isabel LauMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Annalise WhinesMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Sarah N GarfinkelInsitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK.
Camilla L NordMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Interoception-sensation, interpretation, and prediction of bodily signals-is reliably disrupted across a wide range of mental health conditions. A growing body of evidence suggests that interoception is a putative mechanism, or 'active ingredient', of effective psychological and pharmacological treatments. Anecdotally, patients with psychiatric disorders report differences in bodily experiences. However, formal priority setting by people with lived experience of mental health conditions has so far been overlooked in this rapidly expanding research area. Methods: This article takes a mixed-methods approach to investigate experiences of bodily signals in individuals with mental health conditions and determine patients' research priorities. We recruited two UK samples in the context of an in-person workshop (N = 25) and online (N = 47), between April and July 2024. All contributors had a diagnosis of at least one mental health condition. Using a combination of written contributions and small group discussions, we explored the most relevant bodily sensations for patients' mental health, how bodily sensations were experienced by patients, and which research priorities were considered most important. Findings: Patients' contributions emphasised the multimodal nature of interoception, in particular the importance of less frequently studied modalities such as the stomach and muscle tension, as well as the need to consider the causes and consequences of distressing bodily sensations. We summarise ten key research priorities for patients, spanning three themes: causes, management, and clinical/research approach to interoception in mental health. These priorities include investigating the impact of bodily signals on social contexts, techniques to manage distressing signals, and a shift of approach towards integrating mental and physical health in clinical/research settings. Interpretation: Together, this broad scoping study establishes new, transdiagnostic, patient-led priorities for the developing field of interoception in psychiatry to ensure future research focusses on the areas of greatest impact for people with mental health conditions. Funding: This work was supported by a Wellcome Mental Health award to C.L.N. and S.G. (226778/Z/22/Z), intramural funding from the UK Medical Research Council (MC/UU/00030/12), and a Wellcome Career Development Award to C.L.N. (226490/Z/22/Z). G.M. is funded by an ESRC DTP Studentship (RG84395). This research was also supported by the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014).

Indexed as

InteroceptionLived-experienceMental healthPatient prioritiesPsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID40235945
PMCPMC11999071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.