Cited by 129Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Core outcome domains for clinical trials on somatic symptom disorder, bodily distress disorder, and functional somatic syndromes: European Network on Somatic Symptom Disorders recommendations

Open access
Rief, Winfried, Burton, Chris, Frostholm, Lisbeth, Henningsen, Peter, Kleinstäuber, Maria, Kop, Willem J., Löwe, Bernd, Martin, Alexandra +6 more·2017·Psychosomatic Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The harmonization of core outcome domains in clinical trials facilitates comparison and pooling of data, and simplifies the preparation and review of research projects and comparison of risks and benefits of treatments. Therefore, we provide recommendations for the core outcome domains that should be considered in clinical trials on the efficacy and effectiveness of interventions for somatic symptom disorder, bodily distress disorder, and functional somatic syndromes. METHODS: The European Network on Somatic Symptom Disorders group of more than 20 experts in the field met twice in Hamburg to discuss issues of assessment and intervention research in somatic symptom disorder, bodily distress disorder, and functional somatic syndromes. The consensus meetings identified core outcome domains that should be considered in clinical trials evaluating treatments for somatic symptom disorder and associated functional somatic syndromes. RESULTS: The following core domains should be considered when defining ascertainment methods in clinical trials: a) classification of somatic symptom disorder/bodily distress disorder, associated functional somatic syndromes, and comorbid mental disorders (using structured clinical interviews), duration of symptoms, medical morbidity, and prior treatments; b) location, intensity, and interference of somatic symptoms; c) associated psychobehavioral features and biological markers; d) illness consequences (quality of life, disability, health care utilization, health care costs; e) global improvement and treatment satisfaction; and f) unwanted negative effects. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed criteria are intended to improve synergies of clinical trials and to facilitate decision making when comparing different treatment approaches. These recommendations should not result in inflexible guidelines, but increase consistency across investigations in this field.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/psy.0000000000000502

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 65 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [60]60. Luborsky L, Barber JP, Siqueland L, Johnson S, NAJAVITS LM, FRANK A, DALEY D. The revised Helping Alliance questionnaire (HAQ-II): psychometric properties. The Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research. 1996;5:260.
  2. [65]65. Ladwig I, Rief W, Nestoriuc Y. What are the Risks and Side Effects to Psychotherapy? Development of an Inventory for the Assessment of Negative Effects of Psychotherapy (INEP). Verhaltenstherapie. 2014;24:252-63.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rief, W., Burton, C., Frostholm, L., Henningsen, P., Kleinstäuber, M., Kop, W. J., Löwe, B., Martin, A., Malt, U., Rosmalen, J., Schröder, A., Shedden-Mora, M., Toussaint, A., & van der Feltz-Cornelis, C.
Affiliations
Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Rief, Winfried
Venue
Psychosomatic Medicine
Published
2017-11
Volume
79
Issue
9
Pages
1008-1015
ISSN
  • 0033-3174 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-7796
OpenAlex
W2728172048
Cited by
129
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 3
FWCI
8.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychosomatic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
core outcome domains, somatic symptom disorder, functional somatic syndromes, clinical trial reporting, quality of life, disability, health care utilization, health care costs, treatment satisfaction, adverse effects, biomarkers, comorbid mental disorders, symptom duration
MeSH terms
Medically Unexplained Symptoms, Clinical Trials as Topic, Europe, Humans, Psychophysiologic Disorders, Societies, Medical, Somatoform Disorders, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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