Identifying diagnostic biomarkers in functional motor disorders through multimodal behavioral, neurophysiological, and imaging assessment using explainable machine learning
Clinical Snapshot
PICO Framework
| P — Population | Adults with clinically established functional motor disorders (n=75) and age- and sex-matched healthy controls (n=75) |
| I — Intervention | Multimodal assessment including behavioral, neurophysiological, and brain MRI measures |
| C — Comparator | Healthy controls |
| O — Outcomes | Diagnostic accuracy metrics (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, AUC-ROC) for distinguishing FMDs from controls using machine learning classifier |
Bottom Line
This multicenter study demonstrates that a combination of motor, neuroimaging, and neurophysiological markers can distinguish functional motor disorders from healthy controls with good accuracy (85% accuracy, 84% sensitivity, 86% specificity). The strongest diagnostic features included dual-task motor performance, brain network connectivity patterns, and neurophysiological responses. While the results are promising for objective FMD diagnosis, several methodological concerns limit confidence in the findings, including unclear blinding procedures, lack of confidence intervals, and potential spectrum bias. The complex multimodal assessment protocol would be challenging to implement in routine clinical practice, limiting immediate clinical utility. The study represents an important step toward objective biomarkers for FMD diagnosis but requires validation in broader clinical populations and simplified assessment protocols before widespread implementation.
Key Findings
P Value: Not reported
Effect Size: AUC-ROC 0.921
Primary Outcome: Diagnostic accuracy of multimodal biomarkers for FMD diagnosis
Nnt Or Sensitivity: Sensitivity 83.9%, Specificity 86.1%
Confidence Interval: Not reported
Clinical Application
Limited feasibility due to requirement for specialized neurophysiological equipment, advanced MRI capabilities, and trained personnel Would require significant infrastructure investment in Australian neurological centers; potential application in tertiary referral centers with research capabilities; alignment with RACGP guidelines for specialist referral in complex neurological presentations Adults with suspected functional motor disorders in specialized neurological centers
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Functional motor disorders (FMDs) represent a frequent and disabling neurological condition. The lack of reliable diagnostic biomarkers and their heterogeneity might affect diagnosis. We identified multimodal biomarkers distinguishing FMDs from healthy controls (HCs) using machine-learning approaches. METHODS: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, consecutive adults with a clinically established FMDs diagnosis (n = 75, 74.7% female; mean age 44.20 ± 12.92) and age- and sex-matched HCs (n = 75; 58.6% female; 48.42 ± 11.67) were recruited. All participants underwent standardized behavioral, neurophysiological, and brain MRI assessment exploring motor, exteroceptive, and interoceptive domains. A Random Forest (RF) classifier combined with repeated stratified k-fold cross-validation was trained on the collected features. Predictive performance was evaluated using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, F1-score, and AUC-ROC. SHapley Additive exPlanations interpreted feature importance. RESULTS: The strongest diagnostic biomarkers were lower dual-task effect scores for postural sway area under eyes-closed motor and cognitive conditions, and gait speed during the motor dual-task, followed by increased vDMN and basal ganglia networks functional connectivity, reduced baseline ipsilateral-contralateral R2 blink reflex area, and higher DNIC-to-baseline N2P2 amplitude ratios for the lower limb. The RF classifier achieved robust performance (accuracy 85.0%, sensitivity 83.9%, specificity 86.1%, F1-score 85.7%, AUC-ROC 0.921). CONCLUSIONS: Motor, functional neuroimaging, and neurophysiological markers demonstrated diagnostic value in distinguishing FMDs from healthy controls, addressing the current lack of objective tools and supporting more confident and accurate diagnosis of these heterogeneous conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number NCT06328790. Registered on 26 March 2024.
References
- 1.Gandolfi, M., Sandri, A., Russo, M., Sarasso, E., Gardoni, A., Basaia, S., Erro, R., Cuoco, S., Carotenuto, I., Ricciardi, C., Amato, F., Vinciguerra, C., Botto, A., Amboni, M., Romano, D., Di Vico, I. A., Fiorio, M., Pedrotti, G., Paolicelli, A., Crestani, M., Fratucello, A., Mansueto, G., Pizzini, F. B., Barillari, M., Lauriola, M. F., Tozzi, M., Rusciano, F., Geroin, C., Fasoli, M., Marotta, A., Salaorni, F., Squintani, G. M., Mariotto, S., Tamburin, S., Paio, F., De Biasi, G., Piscosquito, G., Zenere, L., Canu, E., Barone, P., Filippi, M., Agosta, F., Pellecchia, M. T., & Tinazzi, M. (2026). Identifying diagnostic biomarkers in functional motor disorders through multimodal behavioral, neurophysiological, and imaging assessment using explainable machine learning. Journal of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-025-13385-6
Related Research
Sleep medicine reviews
Machine and deep learning in REM sleep behavior disorder: a scoping review and analysis of reporting quality
3 Aug 2026
Neurological research
Federated deep learning model for epilepsy seizure detection using electroencephalogram (EEG) signal
2 Aug 2026
Journal of psychiatric research
Systematic review of machine learning and deep learning models for EEG-based detection of depression.
2 Aug 2026
This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service