MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310534348 · doi:10.1192/bjo.2022.597

Dissociation and its biological and clinical associations in functional neurological disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4310534348 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBJPsych Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustNIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research CentreKing's College LondonNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Health and Social Care
KeywordsMeta-analysisDissociation (chemistry)MedicinePsychologyChemistryInternal medicineOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Studies have reported elevated rates of dissociative symptoms and comorbid dissociative disorders in functional neurological disorder (FND); however, a comprehensive review is lacking. Aims To systematically review the severity of dissociative symptoms and prevalence of comorbid dissociative disorders in FND and summarise their biological and clinical associations. Method We searched Embase, PsycInfo and MEDLINE up to June 2021, combining terms for FND and dissociation. Studies were eligible if reporting dissociative symptom scores or rates of comorbid dissociative disorder in FND samples. Risk of bias was appraised using modified Newcastle–Ottawa criteria. The findings were synthesised qualitatively and dissociative symptom scores were included in a meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42020173263). Results Seventy-five studies were eligible (FND n = 3940; control n = 3073), most commonly prospective case–control studies ( k = 54). Dissociative disorders were frequently comorbid in FND. Psychoform dissociation was elevated in FND compared with healthy ( g = 0.90, 95% CI 0.66–1.14, I 2 = 70%) and neurological controls ( g = 0.56, 95% CI 0.19–0.92, I 2 = 67%). Greater psychoform dissociation was observed in FND samples with seizure symptoms versus healthy controls ( g = 0.94, 95% CI 0.65–1.22, I 2 = 42%) and FND samples with motor symptoms ( g = 0.40, 95% CI −0.18 to 1.00, I 2 = 54%). Somatoform dissociation was elevated in FND versus healthy controls ( g = 1.80, 95% CI 1.25–2.34, I 2 = 75%). Dissociation in FND was associated with more severe functional symptoms, worse quality of life and brain alterations. Conclusions Our findings highlight the potential clinical utility of assessing patients with FND for dissociative symptomatology. However, fewer studies investigated FND samples with motor symptoms and heterogeneity between studies and risk of bias were high. Rigorous investigation of the prevalence, features and mechanistic relevance of dissociation in FND is needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.373
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.103 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it