ArticleBJPsych open2018
A population study of Norwegian psychiatric patients referred for clinical brain scanning.
Article in BJPsych open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Diagnosis of an Arachnoid Cyst in a Patient Presenting With Uncommon Depressive Symptoms: Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- The Neuropsychiatric Approach to the Assessment of Patients in Neurology.Seminars in neurology · 2022Article
- Brain imaging in psychiatric disorders: target or screen?BJPsych open · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with psychiatric conditions are often referred for a brain scan during the course of their diagnostic workup.
aimsThe aim of our study is to determine frequency and type of organic brain pathology, the relationship to age, gender and psychiatric diagnosis.
methodWe investigated magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography brain scans from consecutively referred patients over a 10-year period (January 2002-December 2011). The reasons for referral, estimated psychiatric diagnosis, and the pathology discovered for each patient were registered.
resultsA total of 34% of patients demonstrated organic brain pathology, of which 32.8% were considered clinically relevant. This represents a higher frequency of relevant pathology than reported in healthy subjects. Age (
conclusionsBrain imaging in clinical psychiatry resulted in approximately 30% positive findings mainly associated with increasing pathologies with age, but also with diagnosis. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: Both T.O.D. and M.K.B. have received honorary from Novartis for scientific lectures about multiple sclerosis. M.K.B. also received honoraria from Biogen for scientific lectures. The other authors have no conflicts of interest.
Identifiers
What 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.