ArticlePsychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law2020
An exploration of perceived coercion into psychological assessment and treatment within a low secure forensic mental health service.
Article in Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- On Being Open in Closed Places: Vulnerability and Violence in Inpatient Psychiatric Settings.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2025Article
- Healthcare professionals and opposition to court-ordered treatment for offenders: the end of a 'French exception'?Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychologists working within forensic mental health (FMH) services face challenges around supporting clients' informed consent when engaging in psychological assessment and treatment. Given that there is little research in this area, this qualitative study interviewed ten forensic inpatients from a low secure FMH service, to determine the impact of any perceived coercion to engage with psychologists. Interviews were transcribed and subject to Thematic Analysis. Three over-arching themes emerged from the analysis: 'Awareness of Coercive Power', 'Experiencing and Responding to Coercion' and 'Psychological Treatment is Helpful, But…'. Participants perceived coercion to engage with psychologists. Perceived coercion led to psychological distress, wanting to resist, and superficial engagement. Despite this, therapeutic alliance was established with the psychologist but the quality of the therapeutic alliance was compromised. The findings have implications for psychologists working in FMH services. Suggestions for reducing perceived coercion and future directions for research are discussed.
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.