ReviewNeuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater2018
[Coercive interventions: historical summary and review of subjective experience].
Review in Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychiatric treatment has always been associated with violence and coercion. Involuntary admission and coercive measures are still frequently occurring components in everyday clinical practice.Up to 15% of psychiatric inpatients experience coercive treatment at least once during hospital stay. Particularly patients suffering from schizophrenia, organic mental disorders and mania have a high risk for such incidents.There is an ongoing intense debate on the need and justification of coercive measures, although most clinicians and scientists currently agree that there is no alternative. Several investigations have shown that seclusion and mechanical restraint go along with physical and psychological problems affecting both, patients and staff. However, it was possible to identify aspects that could be improved: Maintaining an objective and professional communication during coercive treatment seems just as important as making comprehensible decisions. Alternative treatment options should be focus of further investigations.
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.