ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2026
Feasibility and acceptability of a mixed methods within-subjects comparative design in dance movement therapy for adults with personality disorders.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDance Movement Therapy (DMT) is an established treatment for adults diagnosed with personality disorders (PD). A central component of DMT is the creation of improvised dance material, which supports emotional expression and may enhance autonomy, self-efficacy, and well-being. However, structured dance-based micro-interventions derived from this practice have not yet been systematically described or evaluated. This study was the first attempt to examine the feasibility of implementing a within-subjects comparative study protocol and the acceptability of a structured dance-based micro-intervention, with the aim of informing future controlled trials.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods feasibility study comparing two DMT conditions delivered within ongoing open clinical groups: (a) DMT as Usual (DMT-AU) and (b) a structured dance-based micro-intervention (DMT-MI). Primary outcomes concerned the feasibility of the study protocol, assessed via recruitment, enrolment, retention, adherence, and questionnaire completeness, without evaluating intervention effects. Secondary outcomes concerned the acceptability of the DMT-MI, assessed through session ratings and semi-structured interviews with patients and dance movement therapists.
resultsAll feasibility indicators suggested that the comparative study protocol could be implemented in a real-world clinical setting and that the DMT-MI intervention was acceptable to both patients and therapists. Of the 27 eligible patients, 20 consented to participate (74.1%). Of these included patients19 completed the study (95.0%). Eighteen participants (90.0%) attended both intervention sessions, and 19 (95.0%) participated in the DMT-MI session. Questionnaire return was 100%, with 96% item-level completeness. Semi-structured interviews were completed with all patients (19/19) and both therapists (2/2).
conclusionsA within-subject comparative study protocol and structured DMT micro-intervention were feasible and acceptable when implemented within ongoing DMT group treatment for adults diagnosed with PD in a clinical setting. These findings can inform the design of future controlled trials. Future studies should address recruitment challenges arising from slow and unpredictable patient flow in long-term treatment programs and consider the high diagnostic heterogeneity and comorbidity within PD populations when planning sample sizes and study designs.
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.