ArticleThe journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law2015
Commentary: a comparative review of involuntary admission of people with mental illness in China and Barbados.
Article in The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shao and Xie discuss the changes to involuntary admission laws across seven jurisdictions in China over a 10-year period and the influences on the new National Act. The discussion is important, given allegations of human rights abuses in that country. Strengths and weaknesses of the National Act are raised and compared with our local experience on the island of Barbados. Further discussion of the most appropriate approaches to involuntary admission would be useful.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25770278What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.