Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25886689›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2015

The national trajectory project of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. Part 5: how essential are gender-specific forensic psychiatric services?

Tonia L Nicholls, Anne G Crocker, Michael C Seto, Catherine M Wilson, Yanick Charette, Gilles Côté

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. I'm Not That Person: A Qualitative Study of Moral Injury in Forensic Psychiatric Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Tonia L NichollsAssociate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia; Senior Research Fellow, Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission, BC Mental Health & Substance Use Services, Coquitlam, British Columbia.
Anne G CrockerAssociate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec; Associate Director, Policy and Knowledge Exchange, Douglas Mental Health University Institute Research Centre, Montreal, Quebec.
Michael C SetoDirector of Forensic Rehabilitation Research, Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Brockville, Ontario.
Catherine M WilsonPost-doctoral Research Fellow, University of British Columbia and British Columbia Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission, BC Mental Health & Substance Use Services, Coquitlam, British Columbia.
Yanick CharettePost-doctoral Fellow, Department of Sociology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Gilles CôtéProfessor, Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Quebec; Director, Philippe-Pinel Institute Research Centre, Montreal, Quebec.
BC Mental Health & Substance Use Services · CAInstitut Philippe Pinel de Montréal · CAMcGill University · CARoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre · CAYale University · US

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo state the sociodemographic characteristics, mental health histories, index offence characteristics, and criminal histories of male and female forensic psychiatric patients. Clinicians and researchers advocate that mental health and criminal justice organizations implement gender-specific services; however, few studies have sampled forensic patients to evaluate the extent to which men's and women's treatment and management needs are different.

methodData were collected from Review Board files from May 2000 to April 2005 in the 3 largest Canadian provinces. Using official criminal records, participants were followed for 3 to 8 years, until December 2008. The final sample comprised 1800 individuals: 15.6% were women and 84.4% were men.

resultsThere were few demographic differences, but women had higher psychosocial functioning than men. Both men and women had extensive mental health histories; women were more likely diagnosed with mood disorders and PDs and men were more likely diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and SUDs. The nature of the index offence did not differ by gender, except women were more likely to have perpetrated murders and attempted murders. For offences against a person, women were more likely to offend against offspring and partners and less likely to offend against strangers, compared with men. Women had significantly less extensive criminal histories than men.

conclusionsNot criminally responsible on account of mental disorder-accused women have a distinct psychosocial, clinical, and criminological profile from their male counterparts, which may suggest gender-specific assessment, risk management, and treatment in forensic services could benefit patients. The findings are also consistent with traditional models (Risk-Need-Responsivity) and ultimately demonstrate the importance of individual assessment and client-centred services.

Indexed as

AdultBritish ColumbiaCriminalsFemaleForensic PsychiatryHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedOntarioPersons with Psychiatric DisordersQuebecSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID25886689
PMCPMC4394713
OpenAlexW266499193

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.