Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35296288›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2022

"Voluntary in quotation marks": a conceptual model of psychological pressure in mental healthcare based on a grounded theory analysis of interviews with service users.

Sarah Potthoff, Jakov Gather, Christin Hempeler, Astrid Gieselmann, Matthé Scholten

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Voluntariness of requests for assisted suicide].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah PotthoffInstitute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Markstraße 258a, 44799, Bochum, Germany. sarah.potthoff@rub.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0434-8218
Jakov GatherInstitute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Markstraße 258a, 44799, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1681-7472
Christin HempelerInstitute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Markstraße 258a, 44799, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8532-3284
Astrid GieselmannInstitute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Markstraße 258a, 44799, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2098-3054
Matthé ScholtenInstitute for Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Markstraße 258a, 44799, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8000-8974
LWL-Universitätsklinikum Bochum · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DERuhr University Bochum · DEUniversity Hospitals of the Ruhr-University of Bochum · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPsychological pressure refers to communicative strategies used by professionals and informal caregivers to influence the decision-making of service users and improve their adherence to recommended treatment or social rules. This phenomenon is also commonly referred to as informal coercion or treatment pressure. Empirical studies indicated that psychological pressure is common in mental healthcare services. No generally accepted definition of psychological pressure is available to date. A first conceptual analysis of psychological pressure focused on staff communication to promote treatment adherence and distinguished between persuasion, interpersonal leverage, inducements and threats.

aimThe aim of this study was to develop a conceptual model of psychological pressure based on the perspectives of service users.

methodsData were collected by means of semi-structured interviews. The sample consisted of 14 mental health service users with a self-reported psychiatric diagnosis and prior experience with coercion in mental healthcare. We used theoretical sampling and contacted participants via mental healthcare services and self-help groups to ensure a variety of attitudes toward the mental healthcare system in the sample. The study was conducted in Germany from October 2019 to January 2020. Data were analyzed according to grounded theory methodology.

resultsThe study indicated that psychological pressure is used not only to improve service users' adherence to recommended treatment but also to improve their adherence to social rules; that it is exerted not only by mental health professionals but also by relatives and friends; and that the extent to which service users perceive communication as involving psychological pressure depends strongly on contextual factors. Relevant contextual factors were the way of communicating, the quality of the personal relationship, the institutional setting, the material surroundings and the level of convergence between the parties' understanding of mental disorder.

conclusionsThe results of the study highlight the importance of staff communication training and organizational changes for reducing the use of psychological pressure in mental healthcare services.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersMental Health ServicesCaregiversCoercionGrounded TheoryHealth PersonnelHumansQualitative ResearchCommunicationInformal coercionInformed consentPerceived coercionPsychiatryQualitative researchTreatment pressureVoluntariness

Identifiers

PMID35296288
PMCPMC8928679
OpenAlexW4220865485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.