Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26615405›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2016

The public debate on psychotropic medication and changes in attitudes 1990-2011.

Matthias C Angermeyer, Sandra Van der Auwera, Herbert Matschinger, Mauro G Carta, Sebastian E Baumeister, Georg Schomerus

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2016. 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. 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

6 authors.

Matthias C AngermeyerCenter for Public Mental Health, Untere Zeile 13, 3482, Gösing am Wagram, Austria. angermeyer@aon.at.
Sandra Van der AuweraDepartment of Psychiatry, University Medicine Greifswald, Ellernholzstr. 1-2, 17475, Greifswald, Germany.
Herbert MatschingerInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Str. 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Mauro G CartaDepartment of Public Health, Clinical and Molecular Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cittadella, Universitaria asse didattica E, Monserrato, CA, Italy.
Sebastian E BaumeisterInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Georg SchomerusDepartment of Psychiatry, University Medicine Greifswald, Ellernholzstr. 1-2, 17475, Greifswald, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last 25 years, the appraisal of psychotropic drugs within the scientific community and their representation in the media has changed considerably. The initial optimism in the wake of the introduction of second-generation drugs has increasingly made room for a more critical evaluation of alleged advantages of these drugs. The question arises as to what extent this is reflected in similar changes in the public's attitudes towards psychiatric medication. Three representative population surveys on attitudes towards psychotropic medication were carried out in Germany in 1990 (N = 3075), 2001 (N = 2610) and 2011 (N = 1223), using the same sampling procedure, interview mode and instrument for assessing attitudes. In order to disentangle time-related effects, an age-period-cohort analysis was performed. Over the time period of 21 years, the German public's evaluation of psychotropic medication has become markedly more favourable. This change was mostly due to a period effect, i.e. concurrent influences of the social environment people are exposed to. Changes were much more pronounced in the 1990s, while over the following decade only a small, although statistically significant, increase in the favourable appraisal of medication was found. Age and birth cohort had only a minor effect on public attitudes. Our findings suggest that changes in the evaluation of the effects of psychotropic drugs within the psychiatric community and their representation in the media also affect public opinion. Given the ongoing debate about side effects and efficacy of psychiatric medication, future changes of public opinion can be expected.

Indexed as

AttitudePublic OpinionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesFemaleGermanyHealth SurveysHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedPersonalityPsychotropic DrugsPsychotropic DrugsAttitudesPopulation studyPsychotropic medicationTime trend

Identifiers

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.