CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsDeception detection and forensic psychologyElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies

A Scoping Review of Treatment for Factitious Disorder (Imposed on Self)

Open access
Liu, Rose Kong, Green, Jessica, Newton, Richard·2025·Psychiatry Research Communications
DOI 10.1016/j.psycom.2025.100216
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Introduction Factitious disorder imposed on self (FDIS) has a deleterious impact on sufferers through the sequalae of induced illness as well as the consequences of unnecessary investigations and treatments. Objective This scoping review aimed to map the existing literature regarding the types of data, data quality, treatment options and outcomes, and changes in treatment approaches over time. Method A search was performed using Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycINFO, Cumulated Index in Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Results Seventy-two studies were included (71 case reports and one case series) relating to the management of 107 participants. The quality of reporting was limited for 61% of studies. The most common factitious illnesses were dermatological manipulation creating a skin lesion, anaemia, and bleeding. The most common treatments were supportive psychotherapy, psychiatric hospitalisation, and antidepressants. Mapping publications across time revealed that 50% of all data were published after 2011, and medication treatments became more common over time. Confrontation was reported in 40% of participants. Conclusions Evidence has expanded slightly in the past 17 years and this data remains exclusively at the case study level. Data relating to management were of poor quality and incompletely reported. The high frequency of confrontation and positive outcomes reported is suggestive of se…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psycom.2025.100216

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Latest research in the management of factitious disorder is limited, with most data generated from case reports or case series.

    “Latest research in the management of factitious disorder is limited, with most data generated from case reports or case series [81].”

    From Non-Diabetic Hypoglycemia: Evaluation and Management in Adults (2025) · cites this paper as [81]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Liu, R. K., Green, J., & Newton, R.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research centre (AU)
Corresponding author
Liu, Rose Kong
ORCID
Venue
Psychiatry Research Communications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-06
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
100216
ISSN
2772-5987 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.psycom.2025.100216
OpenAlex
W4410578190
Cited by
11
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 3
FWCI
7.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (cc-by)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University)
Funders
Monash University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Keywords
factitious disorder, treatment options, confrontation therapy, supportive therapy, psychiatric hospitalization, antidepressants, publication bias, reporting quality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review