Integrating cognitive-behavioral training with immersive virtual reality intervention in ADHD: a case report

IntroductionAttention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a condition characterized by persistent patterns of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity. This case highlights the potential benefit of integrating Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR) with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in the rehabilitation of a child with ADHD. It contributes to emerging evidence by showing how a combined approach may simultaneously target executive, attentional, and motor domains within a single intervention.Case presentationAn 8-year-old child with deficits in sustained and selective attention, impaired executive functioning (including planning and working memory), impulsivity, and difficulties in motor regulation, as revealed during baseline assessments, impacting daily functioning. The patient was diagnosed with combined-type ADHD and underwent a 12-week CBT intervention, followed by integrated IVR-CBT intervention targeting executive functions and self-control, once a week for 12 weeks. The intervention was conducted using the CAREN (Computer Assisted Rehabilitation Environment), an immersive virtual reality platform integrating multisensory input and interactive tasks to promote cognitive and motor engagement. Post-intervention assessments showed improvements in sustained and selective attention, planning, working memory, and balance. There was also an increase in involvement and a reduction in impulsivity.ConclusionThe findings support the hypothesis that immersive, embodied interventions targeting both executive and sensorimotor processes may represent a promising novelty adjunctive rehabilitation approach. Further studies are needed to evaluate efficacy, generalizability, and to confirm these findings in larger samples. This case report was prepared in accordance with the CARE Guidelines.

Quitting smoking is hard. A Medicare change may push doctors to give more help

Pretty much everyone who cares about public health agrees that it’s a good idea to help people quit smoking, the No. 1 cause of preventable death in the U.S. Doctors may soon get some extra encouragement to lend a hand, thanks to proposed changes in Medicare’s physician fee schedules.

Physicians who offer counseling on quitting cigarettes or other tobacco products during visits with patients would get a 19% increase in reimbursement, according to a few paragraphs buried in the 1,592-page document released this week. The same adjustment would also apply to assessments of, and interventions for, alcohol and substance misuse during doctors’ visits.

“Given the evidence supported role these services play in preventing and managing chronic disease […] we believe that valuation should more accurately reflect the clinical intensity and work associated with these time-based services,” the proposal from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services explains. Comments on the proposal are due Sept. 14. 

“The prioritization of cessation as a service is long overdue, and we’re very excited about it,” said Anne DiGiulio, the American Lung Association’s senior director of nationwide tobacco cessation and health policy.

Read the rest…

<![CDATA[Learn how clinicians manage bipolar disorder in women who may become pregnant—safer meds, contraception counseling, and relapse prevention.]]>

Pharmacotherapy, acupoint stimulation, and psychotherapy for perimenopausal women with anxiety, depression, and panic disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundPerimenopausal women frequently experience physiological and psychological symptoms, including anxiety, depression, and panic disorders, mainly due to declining ovarian function and hormonal changes. Current options include pharmacotherapy, acupoint stimulation (AcuStim), and psychotherapy (psych), but their comparative efficacy and safety remain controversial.ObjectiveThis network meta-analysis (NMA) systematically compared pharmacotherapy, AcuStim, and psychotherapy for perimenopausal anxiety, depression, and panic disorder, assessing clinical efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and changes in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), Kupperman Index (KI), Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS), Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and serum hormone levels.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and SinoMed from inception to June 14, 2026, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A Bayesian NMA was performed, and the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) was calculated.ResultsThe study included 131 RCTs, encompassing 11457 perimenopausal women diagnosed with emotional disorders. These trials evaluated three distinct treatment strategies. The NMA showed that the highest SUCRA probabilities were observed for drug_psych across HAMD (SUCRA = 92.4%), KI (SUCRA = 97.9%), SDS (SUCRA = 94.5%), PSQI (SUCRA = 98.1%), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (SUCRA = 96.1%) reduction and estradiol (E2) (SUCRA = 0.1%) elevation; for AcuStim_psych (SUCRA = 93.7%) in HAMA reduction; for psych (SUCRA = 98.9%) in SAS reduction; for drug_AcuStim in clinical efficacy (SUCRA = 9.0%) and luteinizing hormone (LH) reduction (SUCRA = 100%); and for control (SUCRA = 65.5%) in safety outcomes. In pharmacotherapy subgroup analyses, antidepressants (ADs)_Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) ranked highest for HAMD (SUCRA = 87.2%) and safety (SUCRA = 82%), ADs_antipsychotics (AP) (SUCRA = 97.5%) for HAMA, and ADs_hormone replacement therapy (HRT) (SUCRA = 10.2%) for clinical efficacy.ConclusionPharmacological, acupoint stimulation, and psychological interventions each demonstrated therapeutic benefits for perimenopausal women with emotional disorders. Combination therapies generally showed more favorable efficacy across multiple psychological and endocrine outcomes than single-modality interventions, while no single treatment strategy was consistently superior across all outcomes. These findings may provide evidence to support individualized treatment selection according to patients’ clinical characteristics and therapeutic goals.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420261340530.

Why affirming trans identities can be critical for suicide prevention counseling

Specialized counseling services for LGBTQ+ youth will return to the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by the end of the year, the Trump administration confirmed last month. But young people looking to “press 3” for that support may encounter an altered experience, as federal health officials want to ensure the services comply with President Trump’s executive order last year that essentially denies the existence of transgender and nonbinary identities. 

The Trump administration shuttered the LGBTQ+ youth specialty services last July, but soon after, a congressional appropriations bill directed $33.1 million toward reinstating the line. The law indicates that services should support all LGBTQ+ youth. 

Read the rest…

Fragile self, mechanical world: mechanistic delusions and ego fragility in schizotypal–affective spectrum disorder—a CARE case report

Categorical nosological systems frequently fall short when confronted with patients whose presentations cross established diagnostic boundaries. We report M.S., a 44-year-old Brazilian man involuntarily admitted to a psychiatric inpatient unit who presented with systematized persecutory ideation of mechanistic–technological content (chip implantation, satellite-based surveillance), structural ego fragility, absent insight, and progressive social and occupational deterioration. While prior diagnoses of bipolar disorder and provisional schizophrenia had been considered, neither fully captured the clinical complexity. Psychopathological-dimensional analysis, grounded in phenomenological observation and contemporary psychopathological theory, suggests three potentially interacting axes: (1) structural ego fragility (Ich-Schwäche), potentially arising from impaired early attachment and deficient relational learning; (2) a relational causality deficit replaced by concrete–mechanistic reasoning; and (3) limbic hyperactivation that appears to sustain an anxiety–perplexity–paranoia feedback loop. These converge on a schizotypal–affective spectrum formulation. Laboratory investigations identified severe dyslipidemia and marked hyperandrogenism (total testosterone 1,367 ng/dL), the latter potentially associated with limbic hyperactivation, though causality cannot be established from a single cross-sectional measurement. Psychometric assessment (BPRS-18) at admission yielded a total score of 43, with suspiciousness (5) and unusual thought content (5) as dominant items. During a seven-day inpatient course, a multimodal thymic strategy—risperidone, lithium carbonate, and structured psychotherapy—produced attenuation of paranoid reactivity, improved family engagement, and the spontaneous resumption of guitar playing from day 3, as a functional correlate of behavioral stabilization. The patient was discharged with a referral for a three-monthly paliperidone palmitate long-acting injectable. The pharmacological response retrospectively supports the dimensional formulation and illustrates the heuristic value of psychopathological analysis grounded in ego structure, causal reasoning, and affective dysregulation as a complementary approach to categorical nosology in complex psychotic–affective presentations.

BFRBs vs. OCD: Similarities and Differences

This blog was originally posted by the TLC Foundation for BFRBs

Body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRBs) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are two distinct mental health conditions that share some similarities but also have significant differences. BFRBs involve repetitive, self-grooming behaviors that can cause physical damage, such as hair pulling or skin picking. On the other hand, OCD is a condition characterized by intrusive thoughts (obsessions) and repetitive behaviors (compulsions) performed to alleviate anxiety. 

While both conditions involve repetitive behaviors and can impact daily life, their underlying mechanisms, triggers, and treatment approaches differ. This article explores the key similarities and differences between BFRBs and OCD to better understand these complex conditions.

Similarities Between BFRBs and OCD

Most professionals view BFRBs and OCD as similar conditions due to the similarity in symptoms, such as compulsivity and repetitive behaviors. These two conditions share several similar systems and are usually a reaction to triggering factors such as stress and anxiety. Below are some of their similarities.

Repetitive Behaviors

Individuals dealing with BFRBs often engage in various repetitive behaviors such as hair pulling, lip biting, or skin picking. These actions are usually challenging to control and are frequently triggered by stress or anxiety. One may indulge in the habit subconsciously to find instant relief from the trigger. 

Individuals with OCD often experience intrusive thoughts that result in repetitive behaviors known as compulsions. Some common compulsions include washing hands and repetitively checking or counting to alleviate the stress caused by obsessive thoughts. In both conditions, the repetitive behaviors are often exacerbated by stress and anxiety, and individuals may adapt these behaviors as a coping mechanism.

Impulse Control

Closely related to repetitive behaviors is the concept of impulse control. Both BFRBs and OCD involve challenges in this area, albeit in different ways. Individuals with BFRBs and OCD may find it hard to control the urge to perform repetitive behaviors. This is because these repetitive behaviors often relieve tension. Despite knowing the consequences of these behaviors, the desire to indulge in them is usually irresistible. 

For example, individuals with BFRBs understand that hair pulling may affect their appearance, but they cannot refrain from doing it. OCD occurs as a result of intrusive thoughts whereby one believes that if they do not perform a specific action, the stressor won’t go away. These intrusive thoughts often cause anxiety, which can be eased by engaging in the said repetitive behavior.

Onset and Course

Having examined the behavioral aspects, let’s now consider how these conditions develop over time. The onset of these two conditions shares several similarities regarding age, triggers, and psychological mechanisms. 

The onset of both conditions is usually during childhood or adolescence and often coincides with various developmental changes and stressors. For individuals with BFRBs, the repetitive behaviors alleviate stress and anxiety instantly. At the same time, for those with OCD, performing the compulsions temporarily relieves them from the stress caused by their intrusive thoughts. The cognitive patterns involve repetitive actions, intrusive thoughts, and a lack of impulse control. In BFRBs, the urge to engage in these repetitive behaviors can be intrusive and persistent, while in OCD, one’s obsessions create a sense of urgency, which leads to the adoption of compulsive actions.

Neurobiological Factors

To fully understand the similarities between BFRBs and OCD, we must delve deeper into their biological underpinnings. Both conditions have a genetic origin and are associated with neurobiological factors. Neurobiological studies indicate that the impulse control and emotional regulation difficulties for people with BFRBs and OCD are often caused by abnormalities in brain regions that are responsible for impulse control and habit formation. Therefore, the underlying brain mechanism may result in the onset and development of both conditions. It is not uncommon for individuals to have both BFRBs and OCD or for both conditions to coincide with other mental health conditions, usually depression and anxiety. The overlap is generally because they typically share common underlying factors that play a part in their severity and development.

Differences Between OCD and BFRBs

While BFRBs and OCD share several commonalities, it’s equally important to understand their distinct characteristics, from the symptoms to the underlying mechanisms. Let’s explore the key differences that distinguish these two conditions.

Nature of the Behavior

First and foremost, let’s examine how the behaviors associated with each condition differ in their fundamental nature. Individuals dealing with these two conditions adopt diverse behaviors as coping mechanisms for their triggers. In BFRBs, the behaviors adopted, such as trichotillomania (hair-pulling) or cheek-biting, usually result in physical harm. However, regardless of the consequences, one always feels relieved when picking their skin or pulling their hair. 

OCD, on the other hand, involves a wide range of compulsions, from washing to organizing, checking, and counting. Compulsive behaviors are performed due to intrusive thoughts that make one think that if they fail to indulge in a specific behavior, they might get hurt, or there might be other negative consequences.

Presence of Obsessions

Another crucial distinction lies in the cognitive processes behind these behaviors. Generally, BFRBs do not involve obsessive thoughts. The primary focus on BFRBs is usually more on the physical behavior and not the fear of specific consequences. 

However, the major characteristic of OCD is intrusive thoughts, which increase the urge to indulge in particular behaviors for relief. The thoughts are usually persistent with unwanted images that result in distress. 

People with BFRBs DO NOT report that if they do not pick on their skin, something terrible will happen. Instead, they report that picking or pulling their hair helps relieve them from intense and negative emotions. These behaviors, therefore, serve a self-regulatory function, unlike in OCD, where the repetitive behavior calms them from their intrusive thoughts.

Triggers

The nature of triggers for each condition is closely related to the presence or absence of obsessions. The primary trigger in BFRBs is stress and anxiety, but for OCD, the main trigger is intrusive thoughts, which then result in anxiety. OCD and BFRBs triggers differ in several ways, often resulting in different outcomes. OCD triggers often result in one taking measures to prevent harm, while for BFRBs, one uses the adopted behaviors to regulate and manage intense emotions. The nature of thoughts is an essential distinguishing factor, seeing as OCD involves intrusive and obsessive thoughts that trigger specific behaviors adopted to prevent harm. The purpose of compulsions in OCD is to reduce the anxiety caused by the obsessive thoughts, while in BFRBs, the behaviors are for emotional relief.

Awareness

Beyond triggers, the level of conscious awareness also differentiates these two conditions. Those dealing with BFRBs usually find themselves biting their nails or even pulling their hair subconsciously. Individuals with OCD are generally aware of their intrusive thoughts and are compelled to adopt specific behaviors as a response to these thoughts. Individuals with OCD are often aware of their compulsions and understand when they are being irrational, but they are unable to control themselves. Compared to people with OCD, those with BFRBs often find their behaviors more rewarding than distressing.

Treatment

Finally, while both conditions may benefit from cognitive behavioral therapy, the specific approach to treatment varies significantly. For individuals with BFRBs, the focus is on behavior modification and awareness, achieved through habit reversal training. For OCD, the emphasis is often placed on exposure to anxiety-provoking thoughts to help an individual tolerate anxiety, which prevents compulsive behavior.

Bottom Line 

While BFRBs and OCD can coexist, they are distinct disorders with unique manifestations despite sharing some similarities. The key distinctions between these conditions are evident in their underlying mechanisms and treatment approaches.

Both involve compulsive behaviors, but their purposes differ. BFRBs primarily serve as subconscious tools for emotional regulation. OCD compulsions are conscious attempts to alleviate anxiety and prevent perceived harmful consequences. BFRB behaviors often occur with limited conscious awareness, while OCD sufferers are typically more aware of their compulsive actions.

Both conditions can significantly affect daily functioning and social interactions.BFRBs may lead to physical injuries and lowered self-esteem due to visible effects. OCD can cause severe anxiety and time-consuming rituals that interfere with daily activities.BFRB treatment emphasizes behavior modification and awareness techniques, while OCD treatment often involves exposure therapy to reduce anxiety responses.

Understanding these distinctions is crucial for accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. While both conditions present challenges, with proper support and intervention, individuals with BFRBs or OCD can learn to manage their symptoms and improve their overall quality of life.

The post BFRBs vs. OCD: Similarities and Differences appeared first on International OCD Foundation.

From promise to practice: artificial intelligence in mental health care in the MENA region

Mental health disorders represent a growing burden across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, where depression and anxiety are highly prevalent amid conflict, displacement, and socioeconomic strain, affecting up to 40 percent of adults, yet treatment gaps remain at 80-95% due to provider shortages, financial strain, and cultural barriers. In this context, artificial intelligence (AI), in the form of large language models (LLMs) and specialized psychotherapy chatbots, may offer a scalable adjunct to help address these gaps through anonymous screening, predictive risk modeling, psychoeducation, and brief interventions. This narrative review examines current evidence of AI-driven conversational tools in mental health with a specific focus on their application, acceptance, and limitations within the MENA region. To do so, A structured search of MEDLINE and Embase (2000–2026) identified studies on conversational AI in mental health, prioritizing evidence from the MENA region and supplemented by relevant global literature. Overall, findings suggest that while these tools offer high accessibility and user engagement, particularly for low-intensity support, their effectiveness is limited by linguistic and cultural mismatches, including Arabic diglossia and poor alignment with locally grounded expressions of distress. At the same time, user acceptance reflects a paradox in which stigma and privacy concerns drive reliance on anonymous AI tools while simultaneously limiting trust in their clinical reliability, reinforcing a preference for hybrid models with human oversight. Taken together, these findings indicate that current systems remain insufficiently adapted to the MENA context, underscoring the need for culturally grounded, dialect-sensitive, and clinically supervised approaches to ensure safe and effective integration.