ArticleThe journal of behavioral health services & research2023
The Role of Bias in Clinical Decision-Making of People with Serious Mental Illness and Medical Co-morbidities: a Scoping Review.
Article in The journal of behavioral health services & research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inequalities in Access to and Outcomes of Cardiac Surgery Among Patients with Mental Health Disorders.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Integrating physical healthcare into psychiatry for severe mental illness: A narrative review and position statement from the ECNP PAN-Health group.Neuroscience applied · 2026Review
- Review
- Comparing artificial intelligence- vs clinician-authored summaries of simulated primary care electronic health records.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Article
- A scoping review and evidence gap analysis of clinical AI fairness.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Factors Associated with Referral to Expert Providers among Patients with Pulmonary Hypertension.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- Bringing the Workforce Shortage into Focus.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2023Article
- Bias in Assessing Decision-making Capacity in Patients with Serious Mental Illness in Hospital Settings.Innovations in clinical neuroscienceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this review was to examine the evidence for the impact of explicit and implicit biases against mental illness on the clinical decision-making of primary care physicians, medical students, and nurses when they are providing care to individuals with serious mental illness for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, EBSCO host, and PsychINFO. A total of 18 studies published between 1996 and 2020 were reviewed and summarized. The studies were divided into two groups-studies that used a simulation or vignette methodology and those with a qualitative approach (interviews and focus groups). Of the simulation/vignette studies that allowed participants to report what they would have done in various clinical scenarios, there were roughly equal numbers of neutral or negative clinical decisions that represented 80% of the relevant behavioral results. Only 21% of the findings demonstrated a clinical decision that was favorable towards people with mental illness. Of the qualitative studies, all of the studies reported behaviors (either self-reported or observed) that were likely to be biased against people with mental illness, while 3 of the studies reported mixed results. Healthcare provider bias against individuals with mental illness does exist and impacts clinical decisions negatively. Much more empirical work needs to be done to determine the full extent and impact of the problem, including how these decisions affect the lives of individuals with mental illness.
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.