Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40627223›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurology2025

Randomised feasibility study evaluating eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy for functional neurological disorder (MODIFI).

Sarah R Cope, Jared G Smith, Sharif El-Leithy, Serena Vanzan, Patricia Hogwood, Dawn Golder, Kati Jane Turner, Maeve Crowley, Jo Billings, Susannah Pick and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05455450 (Randomised Feasibility Study of Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT05455450 nacompletednot on this map

Randomised Feasibility Study of Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing Therapy (EMDR) for Functional Neurological Disorder (FND)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSouth West London and St George's Mental Health NHS TrustRan2022 to 2025Enrolled50ConditionsFunctional Neurological Symptom DisorderArmsEye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy, Neuropsychiatric care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Sarah R CopeClinical Research Unit, South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Road, London, SW17 7DJ, UK. sarah.cope@swlstg.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1672-9459
Jared G SmithClinical Research Unit, South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Road, London, SW17 7DJ, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6138-136X
Sharif El-LeithyTraumatic Stress Service, South West London and St. George's Mental Health NHS Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Rd, London, SW17 7DJ, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3017-2810
Serena VanzanClinical Research Unit, South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Road, London, SW17 7DJ, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5240-8874
Patricia HogwoodClinical Research Unit, South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Road, London, SW17 7DJ, UK.
Dawn GolderClinical Research Unit, South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Road, London, SW17 7DJ, UK.
Kati Jane TurnerClinical Research Unit, South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust, Springfield University Hospital, 61 Glenburnie Road, London, SW17 7DJ, UK.
Maeve CrowleySussex Partnership NHS Trust, Portland House, Richmond Road, Worthing, West Sussex, BN11 1HS, UK.
Jo BillingsDepartment of Psychiatry, University College London, Wing A, 4 Floor, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1238-2440
Susannah PickDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, SE5 8AF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2001-6723
Caitlin PentlandDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, SE5 8AF, UK.
Mark J EdwardsDepartment of Basic and Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, SE5 8AF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8283-9015

Funding

Research for Patient Benefit Programme 202277
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFunctional neurological disorder (FND) is a common neurological presentation with symptoms such as seizures, walking difficulties, limb weakness and cognitive difficulties. Treatments for FND include physiotherapy and psychological therapy. Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR) is a therapy designed to reduce disturbance associated with distressing or traumatic memories. Case report evidence suggests possible benefit for people with FND. This randomised feasibility study aimed to assess whether a large-scale trial evaluating EMDR for FND would be feasible and acceptable.

methodsFifty participants with FND were randomised to either FND-focused EMDR plus standard neuropsychiatric care (NPC) or NPC alone. Feasibility criteria were recruitment rate, intervention adherence, and outcome measure completion. Assessment of safety was also examined, as well as therapy satisfaction. Participants completed questionnaires at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 9 months. FND symptoms were assessed using Ecological Momentary Assessment at each time point.

resultsRecruitment rate was 58%, intervention adherence was 88%, and outcome measure completion was 68% for Ecological Momentary Assessment and 76% for questionnaires at 9-month follow-up. Participants experienced functional motor symptoms (80%), functional seizures (64%), and cognitive symptoms (32%). Participants receiving EMDR + NPC reported greater satisfaction and greater FND improvement compared to NPC. Questionnaire data suggested greater reductions in PTSD, depression, anxiety, dissociation, disability and healthcare-use for EMDR + NPC. DISCUSSION: The study demonstrated that an FND-specific protocol for EMDR was feasible and acceptable. Potential positive effects on FND symptoms, mental health, disability, and healthcare utilisation were found. A full-scale trial is warranted to establish efficacy.

trial registrationNCT05455450 ( www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ).

Indexed as

Eye Movement Desensitization ReprocessingNervous System DiseasesAdultAgedFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultEye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapyFunctional motor disorderFunctional neurological disorderFunctional seizuresPsychological therapyRandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID40627223
PMCPMC12238153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.