Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20200180›Full record

ReviewJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2010

Medicolegal reports in asylum applications: a framework for addressing the practical and ethical challenges.

Alexandra Pitman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Asylum Medicine: Standard and Best Practices.Health and human rights · 2019
    Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Alexandra PitmanDepartment of Mental Health Sciences, UCL Medical School - Royal Free Campus Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, UK. a.pitman@medsch.ucl.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical care of asylum-seekers may bring clinicians in contact with the immigration authorities. A request for a medicolegal report usually requires the responsible clinician to state their opinion on the risks involved in returning an applicant to their country of origin, taking into account their current condition, the treatments available in that country, and the risks involved in travel. This review draws on clinical experience and a review of the literature to describe the work involved in preparing a medical report requested by immigration authorities. Although the starting point chosen is the psychiatric report, the principles described apply to the preparation of immigration reports in any medical discipline.

Indexed as

Emigration and ImmigrationEthics, MedicalHealth StatusRefugeesGatekeepingHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMedical RecordsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID20200180
PMCPMC3072262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.