National survey of training of psychiatrists on advance directives to refuse treatment in bipolar disorder.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Advance Decision Making in Bipolar: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020
   Pooled it
2. Advance Statements for Black African and Caribbean people (AdStAC): protocol for an implementation study.BMC psychiatry · 2023
   Article
3. "Why have I not been told about this?": a survey of experiences of and attitudes to advance decision-making amongst people with bipolar.Wellcome open research · 2019
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.