ArticleBrain communications2025
Feasibility trial of a self-help digital intervention for functional cognitive disorder.
Article in Brain communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 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
- The Functional Neurological Disorder special collection inBrain communications · 2026Article
- Feasibility trial of a self-help digital intervention for functional cognitive disorder.Brain communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functional cognitive disorder is the cognitive subtype of functional neurological disorders. Symptoms are associated with a high level of distress and typically arise due to various risk factors including abnormal focused attention, high memory expectations and poor metacognition. Easily accessible specialized treatments for functional cognitive disorder are needed. Digital interventions are less costly and scalable and allow individuals to engage in self-care in a flexible manner. In this study, we aimed to (i) evaluate the feasibility and safety of a novel self-help digital intervention based on principles of cognitive behavioural therapy and related approaches, (ii) explore preliminary effects of this intervention and (iii) learn about participants' experience with the intervention. Patients were recruited via a neuropsychiatry clinic. They autonomously completed a 6-week intervention, with phone and email technical support, and were assessed at baseline and at the end of the intervention, using self-reported questionnaires. Besides feasibility outcomes, main measures were the metamemory in adulthood questionnaire, subjective memory complaints, clinical global impression of change, Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, Behavioural Responses to Illness Questionnaire, Compensatory Cognitive Strategies Questionnaire, depressive and anxiety symptoms, work and social functioning and quality of life. A within-group design was employed. Means, standard deviations and effect sizes were estimated. Post-treatment semi-structured interviews were conducted to further explore the acceptability and usability of the programme. Of the 38 patients eligible, 37 completed the baseline questionnaires (97% recruitment rate). Thirty started the intervention (54% female, mean age 50.4). Four dropped out (4/30, 13%), with 23/30 (77%) completing three or more modules, and the attrition rate was 37%. Twenty-seven treatment-related negative effects were reported (5% of total). Overall satisfaction with the programme was high with 62% (16/26) reporting feeling 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied'. Sixteen (62%) reported improvement in their cognitive symptoms ('minimally improved', 'much improved' and 'very much improved'). Paired
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.