Observational studyMedicine2020
Accuracy of initial psychiatric diagnoses given by nonpsychiatric physicians: A retrospective chart review.
Observational study in Medicine, 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postictal psychosis concealed during long-term video-electroencephalographic monitoring and unmasked after discharge: A case report.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026Article
- Multi-modal EEG NEO-FFI with Trained Attention Layer (MENTAL) for mental disorder prediction.Brain informatics · 2024Article
- Effects of the Mental Health Law on Peruvian Primary Care Physicians: A Cross-Sectional Study on Knowledge of Major Depressive Disorder.Health services insights · 2024Article
- General practitioners' views towards management of common mental health disorders: Τhe critical role of continuing medical education.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Overview of practice of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2022Article
- Psychiatric Comorbidities in Functional Neurologic Symptom Disorder.Practical neurology (Fort Washington, Pa.)Article
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 at 2 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractDespite the increased morbidity and mortality associated with psychiatric illnesses, there remains a substantial level of inaccuracy of the initial psychiatric diagnoses given by nonpsychiatric physicians. This study examines the accuracy of initial psychiatric diagnoses by non-psychiatric physicians at the McGill University Health Center (MUHC).We conducted a retrospective chart review for all consultations requested from the consultation-liaison psychiatry service at MUHC. We included all the consultations from January 1, 2018, to December 30, 2018, and excluded patient data with established psychiatric diagnoses. In all requested consults, each diagnosis of a referring physician was compared with the final diagnosis given by the C-L psychiatry team. Conformity between the 2 was validated as accurate.Of the 980 referred inpatients, 875 were enrolled. Patients ranged in age and those older than 70 years constituted the largest group: 54.4% were male. For 467 patients (55.20%), the initial diagnostic impression given by the referring physicians agreed with the final diagnosis made by the C-L psychiatry team, while in 379 patients (44.80%), the initial diagnostic impression was not consistent with the final diagnosis made by the C-L team.Diagnostic impressions of neurocognitive and substance use disorders were highly accurate, but this was not the case when the referring physicians suspected depression or bipolar, personality, or psychotic disorders. This study shows that around half of the referrals were accurately diagnosed, which evinces that nonpsychiatric physicians' knowledge regarding psychiatric conditions is not optimal and that might negatively impact screening and treating these conditions.
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.