ArticleBJPsych open2025
Randomised controlled feasibility trial of online group acceptance and commitment therapy for functional cognitive disorder.
Article in BJPsych open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unmet needs in functional neurological disorder related to digital healthcare.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026Review
- Cognition and metacognition in functional motor symptoms and functional seizures: a case-control study.Psychological medicine · 2026Article
- Uncertainty as an operative construct and treatment target in functional neurological disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Cognitive rehabilitation for functional neurological disorder.CNS spectrums · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunctional cognitive disorder is an increasingly recognised subtype of functional neurological disorder for which treatment options are currently limited. We have developed a brief online group acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)-based intervention.
aimsTo assess the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial of this intervention versus treatment as usual (TAU).
methodThe study was a parallel-group, single-blind randomised controlled trial, with participants recruited from cognitive neurology, neuropsychiatry and memory clinics in London. Participants were randomised into two groups: ACT + TAU or TAU alone. Feasibility was assessed on the basis of recruitment and retention rates, the acceptability of the intervention, and signal of efficacy on the primary outcome measure (Acceptance and Action Questionnaire II (AAQ-II)) score, although the study was not powered to demonstrate this statistically. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and at 2, 4 and 6 months post-intervention, including assessments of quality of life, memory, anxiety, depression and healthcare use.
resultsWe randomised 44 participants, with a participation rate of 51.1% (95% CI 40.8-61.5%); 36% of referred participants declined involvement, but retention was high, with 81.8% of ACT participants attending at least four sessions, and 64.3% of ACT participants reported being 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' compared with 0% in the TAU group. Psychological flexibility as measured using the AAQ-II showed a trend towards modest improvement in the ACT group at 6 months. Other measures (quality of life, mood, memory satisfaction) also demonstrated small to modest positive trends.
conclusionsIt has proven feasible to conduct a randomised controlled trial of ACT versus TAU.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.