ArticleBJPsych open2020
Risk factors for repeated emergency compulsory psychiatric admissions.
Article in BJPsych open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of compulsory admission in detainees with acute psychiatric symptoms in the French speaking counties of Switzerland.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Exploring pathways to compulsory detention in psychiatric hospital and ways to prevent repeat detentions; Service user perspectives.PLOS mental health · 2025Article
- Risk of psychiatric readmission in the homeless population: A 10-year follow-up study.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Relationship Between Time of Admission, Help-Seeking Behavior, and Psychiatric Outcomes: "From Dusk Till Dawn".Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe characteristics of patients who have repeated compulsory psychiatric admissions are largely unknown.
aimsTo investigate the frequency and risk factors for repeated emergency compulsory psychiatric admission (ECPA); and to identify targets for interventions to reduce repeated ECPA.
methodData were collected from a database of electronic patient files (EPFs) held by three psychiatric emergency services (PES) in the Netherlands. Analyses were based on the data for adult patients (aged 18-75 years) with a first PES contact in 2010-2015. Using descriptive statistics and regression analysis, we studied the associations between baseline patient factors and repeated ECPA and time to readmission, within a 2-year follow-up period.
resultsWe included 6059 patients: 15.6% had two or more ECPAs. In total, 66% of second ECPAs had occurred within 6 months of the first. About 30% of all ECPAs were repeated ECPAs. Two baseline factors were associated with a higher frequency of a second ECPA: history of receiving any mental healthcare treatment, whether in-patient or out-patient or both, and a lower level of self-care. Three were associated with a lower frequency: ethnicity (other than Dutch), older age and suicidality. Lower Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores and housing problems were associated with a shorter time to compulsory readmission and persistent psychiatric problems with a longer time to compulsory readmission.
conclusionsWe found that 15.6% of patients had two or more ECPAs. Two-thirds of the second ECPAs had occurred within 6 months of the first. Like earlier studies, the risk factors we identified suggest that interventions to reduce the risk of repeated compulsory psychiatric admission should seek to improve self-care, general daily functioning and homelessness.
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.