Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36226107›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Gender and intersecting vulnerabilities on the mental health unit: Rethinking the dilemma.

Elizabeth Kathleen Morton, Sarah K McKenzie, Amy Cooper, Susanna Every-Palmer, Gabrielle Lisa Simone Jenkin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Teaching Medical Students and Residents to Practice Trauma-Informed Care in Inpatient Psychiatric Settings.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth Kathleen MortonDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Sarah K McKenzieDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Amy CooperDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Susanna Every-PalmerDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Gabrielle Lisa Simone JenkinDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
University of Otago · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Gender is routinely pitched as a key determinant of vulnerability for staff and residents on acute mental health inpatient units. Since the 1960's mixed gender units have become more prominent in Western health systems, yet questions remain around the configuration of these units, including how to ensure emotional and physical safety of those living and working in them. Methods: This paper draws on a large study of the lived experiences of 42 staff and 43 service users from different acute mental health units in New Zealand. We conducted thematic analysis of interview data from four units with diverse architectural layouts to identify key themes central to decisions around gender and spatial design. Results: Key themes emerged around gender-related trauma histories, safety perceptions and vulnerabilities, accommodation of gender-diverse and non-binary mental health service users, and gender-specific needs and differences. A further theme, of Conclusions: While findings emphasize the need for safe places for vulnerable people, trauma-informed care, access to staff who "understand," and recreation that is meaningful to the individual, we question if the dilemma of gender-separation vs. gender-mixing is an outmoded design consideration. Instead, we argue that a flexible, person-centered approach to provision of care, which values autonomy, privacy, and safety as defined by each service user, and that promotes choice-making, obviates a model where gender accommodations are fore. We found that a gender-exclusive narrative of vulnerability understates the role of other identifiers in dynamics of risk and vulnerability, including age, physicality, past violence, trauma history, mental unwellness, and substance use. We conclude gender need not be a central factor in decisions around design of prospective built unit environments or in occupational and clinical decisions. Instead, we suggest flexible spatial layouts that accommodate multiple vulnerabilities.

Indexed as

acutearchitecturefacilitygendermental healthservice usersvulnerabilities

Identifiers

PMID36226107
PMCPMC9548606
OpenAlexW4297154648

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.