Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15845140›Full record

ArticleAnnals of general psychiatry2005

Psychiatric morbidity of overseas patients in inner London: A hospital based study.

Fredy J Carranza, Alice M Parshall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of general psychiatry, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Fredy J CarranzaAdult Psychiatry, Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust, London, SW1V-2RH, UK. carraberg@excite.com.
Alice M Parshall

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvaluation of the referral, admission, treatment, and outcome of overseas patients admitted to a psychiatric hospital in central London. Ethical, legal and economic implications, and the involvement of consulates in the admission process, are discussed.

methodAssessment and review of overseas patients admitted between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 1999. Non-parametric statistical tests were used, and relevant outcomes described.

results19% of admissions were overseas patients. Mean age was 38 years. 90% were unattached; 84% were white, 71% from European countries. 45% spoke fluent English. Differences in socio-economic status between home country and England were found. 74% were unwell on arrival; 65% travelled to England as tourists.65% of admissions came via the police. 32% had been ill for more than one year before admission; 68% had psychiatric history. 77% were admitted and 48% discharged under section of the Mental Health Act. 74% had psychotic disorders, all of them with positive symptoms. 55% showed little to moderate improvement in mental state; 10% were on Enhanced Care Programme Approach. Relatives of 48% of patients were contacted.The Hospital repatriated 52% of patients; the Mental Health Team followed up 13% of those discharged. The average length of admission was 43.4 days (range 1-365). Total cost of admissions was GBP350, 600 ($577, 490); average individual cost was GBP11, 116 (range GBP200-81, 000).

conclusionsMentally ill overseas individuals are a vulnerable group that need recognition by health organisations to adapt current practice to better serve their needs. The involvement of consulates needs further evaluation.

Identifiers

PMID15845140
PMCPMC1088010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.