Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41509714›Full record

ArticleBrain communications2026

Clinical and demographic associations of recorded feigning in functional neurological disorder.

Rok Berlot, Thomas A Pollak, Livia Asan, Biba Stanton, Timothy R Nicholson, Mark J Edwards, Richard A Kanaan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Rok BerlotDepartment of Basic & Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6064-2174
Thomas A PollakNeuropsychiatry Research & Education Group, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6171-0810
Livia AsanDepartment of Basic & Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5813-3242
Biba StantonDepartment of Neurology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London SE5 9RS, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2275-9109
Timothy R NicholsonNeuropsychiatry Research & Education Group, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2350-2332
Mark J EdwardsDepartment of Basic & Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8283-9015
Richard A KanaanDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0992-1917

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although functional neurological disorder (FND) is common, increasingly recognized, potentially disabling, and treatable, it remains stigmatized, and concerns about feigning persist among clinicians. We examined the prevalence of malingering and factitious disorder diagnoses in individuals with FND, their associated demographic and clinical characteristics, and evidence of clinician bias in the diagnosis of feigning. In this retrospective cohort and case-control study using the international TriNetX electronic health record network, we analysed diagnostic codes (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) for FND, malingering and factitious disorder to assess their prevalence and overlap. We then compared rates of malingering and factitious disorder following a diagnosis of FND with those in cohorts of patients with multiple sclerosis and with depression, used as comparison conditions. We also examined demographic characteristics and comorbidities of FND cases with and without records of feigning, as well as temporal trends in the proportion diagnosed with malingering. Between 2015 and 2024, 143 471 individuals were diagnosed with FND, 54 685 with malingering and 5215 with factitious disorder. 2.2% of individuals with FND also received a record of malingering or, less commonly, factitious disorder, or both. Following diagnosis, FND was associated with higher rates of malingering (1.36%) and factitious disorder (0.62%) compared to multiple sclerosis (0.17%, odds ratio 7.97, 95% confidence interval 7.17-8.87; and 0.03%, odds ratio 20.47, 95% confidence interval 16.15-25.94, respectively) and depression (0.42%, odds ratio 3.23, 95% confidence interval 3.08-3.39; and 0.05%, odds ratio 12.17, 95% confidence interval 11.18-13.31, respectively). Among FND cases, factitious disorder was more prevalent in White individuals, whereas malingering was more frequent in males, Black individuals and seizure presentations. Compared to other FND cases, those with diagnoses of malingering or factitious disorder had more psychiatric, neurological, and medical comorbidities, greater socio-economic adversity and increased mortality. Records of malingering were more likely in FND cases with histories of other stigmatized disorders, such as sexually transmitted diseases, viral hepatitis and HIV. Their proportion declined from 2018 to 2023. Malingering and factitious disorder are more frequently diagnosed in FND than in comparable disorders, although both remain uncommon. Their presence is associated with greater clinical complexity and poorer outcomes. Associations with ethnicity, socio-economic adversity and certain comorbidities suggest possible clinician bias, while declining malingering diagnoses in FND may reflect growing awareness among clinicians.

Indexed as

clinician biasconversion disorderfactitious disorderfunctional neurological disordermalingering

Identifiers

PMID41509714
PMCPMC12776019

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.