ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2018
Psychiatry's contribution to the public stereotype of schizophrenia: Historical considerations.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspectives of People with Serious Mental Illness on Artificial Intelligence-Based Companions: "If no one told you I love you today, you have someone that cares for you."Community mental health journal · 2026Article
- Psychiatric and functional correlates of stigma associated with cognitive impairment in schizophrenia.Psychiatry research · 2024Article
- Child development, film evidence, and epidemiological sciences: Elwyn James Anthony and the 1957 Zurich International Congress of Psychiatry.History of psychiatry · 2024Article
- Psychiatrists' occupational stigma conceptualization, measurement, and intervention: A literature review.World journal of psychiatry · 2023Review
- Crossroad between current knowledge and new perspective of diagnostic and therapy of late-onset schizophrenia and very late-onset schizophrenia-like psychosis: An update.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Review
- Double bookkeeping and schizophrenia spectrum: divided unified phenomenal consciousness.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2021Article
- The role of trust and hope in antipsychotic medication reviews between GPs and service users a realist review.BMC psychiatry · 2021Review
- Late 'Early Intervention in Psychosis': A Family School for Learning How to Live with Schizophrenia.Consortium psychiatricum · 2021Article
- Modern medicine and the one-size-fits-all approach: A clinician's comment to Alexandra Pârvan's "Mind Electric" article.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2018Article
- Psychiatry's contribution to the public stereotype of schizophrenia: Historical considerations.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The public stereotype of schizophrenia is characterized by craziness, a split personality, unpredictable and dangerous behaviour, and by the idea of a chronic brain disease. It is responsible for delays in help-seeking, encourages social distance and discrimination, and furthers self-stigmatization. This paper discusses the circumstances of the origins of the idea of a chronic brain disease (Emil Kraepelin, 1856-1926), of the split personality concept derived from the term "schizophrenia" (Eugen Bleuler, 1857-1939), and the craziness idea reflected in the "first rank symptoms", which are all hallucinations and delusions (Kurt Schneider, 1887-1967). It shows how Emil Kraepelin's scientific search for homogenous groups of patients with a common aetiology, symptom pattern, and prognosis materialized in the definition of "dementia praecox" as a progressing brain disease; how Eugen Bleuler's life and professional circumstances facilitated an "empathic" approach to his patients and prompted him to put in the foreground incoherence of cognitive and affective functioning, and not the course of the disease; finally, how Kurt Schneider in his didactic attempt to teach general practitioners how to reliably diagnose schizophrenia, neglected what Emil Kraepelin and Eugen Bleuler had emphasized decades earlier and devised his own criteria, consisting exclusively of hallucinations and delusions. In a strange conglomerate, the modern operational diagnostic criteria reflect all three approaches, by claiming to be Neo-Kraepelinean in terms of defining a categorical disease entity with a suggestion of chronicity, by keeping Bleuler's ambiguous term schizophrenia, and by relying heavily on Kurt Schneider's hallucinations and delusions. While interrater reliability may have improved with operational diagnostic criteria, the definition of schizophrenia is still arbitrary and has no empirical validity-but induces stigma.
Indexed as
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.