ReviewThe Hastings Center report2019
The Implications of Genetic and Other Biological Explanations for Thinking about Mental Disorders.
Review in The Hastings Center report, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of gene-by-intervention studies of alcohol and other substance use.Development and psychopathology · 2021Pooled it
- Implications of genetic attributions for addiction among addiction professionals.Journal of psychiatric research · 2024Article
- Psychiatric polygenic risk scores: Child and adolescent psychiatrists' knowledge, attitudes, and experiences.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2022Article
- Perceptions of causal attribution and attitudes to genetic testing among people with schizophrenia and their first-degree relatives.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- Concerns about the use of polygenic embryo screening for psychiatric and cognitive traits.The lancet. Psychiatry · 2022Review
- Genetics of substance use disorders: a review.Psychological medicine · 2021Article
- Return of results in a global survey of psychiatric genetics researchers: practices, attitudes, and knowledge.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- Perceptions of best practices for return of results in an international survey of psychiatric genetics researchers.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2021Article
- Leveraging Neuroscience to Fight Stigma Around Mental Health.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2021Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Given the rise of genetic etiological beliefs regarding psychiatric disorders, a growing body of research has focused on trying to elucidate the effects that such explanatory frameworks might be having on how mental disorders are perceived by patients, clinicians, and the general public. Genetic and other biomedical explanations of mental disorders have long been seen as a potential tool in the efforts to destigmatize mental disorders, given the harshness of the widespread negative attitudes about them and the important negative clinical and social impacts of this stigma. The conventional wisdom has appeared to be that because the effects of genes are seen as falling outside individual control, conceiving of mental disorders as caused by genes casts patients as blameless, thereby reducing stigmatization. Indeed, the results of experimental and correlational research have now robustly linked genetic and other biomedical explanations for mental disorders with reductions in the extent to which people are blamed for their psychiatric symptoms. However, research examining the impact of genetic and other biomedical explanations of mental disorders has also suggested that they can have significant downsides. The most consistently observed negative effect of these kinds of explanations is that they can apparently lead to the assumption that mental disorders are unlikely to improve or abate. Genetic and other biomedical explanations of mental disorders can also increase people's confidence in the effectiveness of biomedical treatments (such as pharmacotherapy) but decrease their confidence in the effectiveness of "nonbiomedical" treatments (such as psychotherapy).
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.