ArticleInternational journal of mental health systems2020
Professionals' perspectives on factors within primary mental health services that can affect pathways to involuntary psychiatric admissions.
Article in International journal of mental health systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can primary mental health services impact levels of involuntary admissions? A cluster-RCT of the ReCoN intervention.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2025Trial
- Mental Health Nurses' Enforcement of Involuntary Care in Inpatient Settings: A Meta-Ethnography.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Review
- Impact of introducing a capacity-based mental health law in Norway: qualitative exploration of multi-stakeholder perspectives.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Changes in inpatient mental health treatment and related costs before and after flexible assertive community treatment: a naturalistic observational cohort study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Observational
- Something Happened with the Way We Work: Evaluating the Implementation of the Reducing Coercion in Norway (ReCoN) Intervention in Primary Mental Health Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Stories of taking part in Everyday Life Rehabilitation - A narrative inquiry of residents with serious mental illness and their recovery pathway.AIMS public health · 2024Article
- Geographical variation in compulsory hospitalisation - ethical challenges.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Article
- Flexible assertive community treatment teams can change complex and fragmented service systems: experiences of service providers.International journal of mental health systems · 2021Article
- Between No Help and Coercion: Toward Referral to Involuntary Psychiatric Admission. A Qualitative Interview Study of Stakeholders' Perspectives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Service Characteristics and Geographical Variation in Compulsory Hospitalisation: An Exploratory Random Effects Within-Between Analysis of Norwegian Municipalities, 2015-2018.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReducing involuntary psychiatric admissions has been on the international human rights and health policy agenda for years. Despite the last decades' shift towards more services for adults with severe mental illness being provided in the community, most research on how to reduce involuntary admissions has been conducted at secondary health care level. Research from the primary health care level is largely lacking. The aim of this study was to explore mental health professionals' experiences with factors within primary mental health services that might increase the risk of involuntary psychiatric admissions of adults, and their views on how such admissions might be avoided.
methodsQualitative semi-structured interviews with thirty-two mental health professionals from five Norwegian municipalities. Data were analysed according to the Systematic Text Condensation method.
resultsWithin primary mental health care professionals experienced that a number of factors could increase the risk of involuntary psychiatric admissions. Insufficient time and flexibility in long-term follow-up, limited resources, none or arbitrary use of crisis plans, lack of tailored housing, few employment opportunities, little diversity in activities offered, limited opportunities for voluntary admissions, inadequate collaboration between services and lack of competence were some of the factors mentioned to increase the risk of involuntary psychiatric admissions. Several suggestions on how involuntary psychiatric admissions might be avoided were put forward.
conclusionsMental health professionals within primary mental health care experienced that their services might play an active part in preventing the use of involuntary psychiatric admissions, suggesting potential to facilitate a reduction by intervening at this service level. Health authorities' incentives to reduce involuntary psychiatric admissions should to a greater extent incorporate the primary health care level. Further research is needed on effective interventions and comprehensive models adapted for this care level.
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.