Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37303935›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of psychiatry2023

Catatonia: "Fluctuat nec mergitur".

Gabor S Ungvari, Stanley N Caroff, Levente Csihi, Gábor Gazdag

Open access · diamondAbstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Gabor S UngvariDivision of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia.
Stanley N CaroffDepartment of Psychiatric Service, Corporal Michael J Cresencz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Levente CsihiDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Rehabilitation, Jahn Ferenc South Pest Hospital, Budapest 1204, Hungary.
Gábor GazdagDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Rehabilitation, Jahn Ferenc South Pest Hospital, Budapest 1204, Hungary.
Jahn Ferenc Dél-Pesti Kórház és Rendelőintézet · HUPhiladelphia VA Medical Center · USSemmelweis University · HUThe University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the beginning of the 1900s, the prevalence of catatonia in inpatient samples was reported to be between 19.5% and 50%. From the mid-1900s, most clinicians thought that catatonia was disappearing. Advances in medical sciences, particularly in the field of neurology, may have reduced the incidence of neurological diseases that present with catatonic features or mitigated their severity. More active pharmacological and psychosocial treatment methods may have either eliminated or moderated catatonic phenomena. Moreover, the relatively narrow descriptive features in modern classifications compared with classical texts and ascribing catatonic signs and symptoms to antipsychotic-induced motor symptoms may have contributed to an apparent decline in the incidence of catatonia. The application of catatonia rating scales introduced in the 1990s revealed significantly more symptoms than routine clinical interviews, and within a few years, the notion of the disappearance of catatonia gave way to its un-expected resurgence. Several systematic investigations have found that, on average, 10% of acute psychotic patients present with catatonic features. In this editorial, the changes in the incidence of catatonia and the possible underlying causes are reviewed.

Indexed as

Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating ScaleCatatoniaDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5Frequency of catatoniaHistorical overviewWernicke–Kleist-Leonhard school

Identifiers

PMID37303935
PMCPMC10251365
OpenAlexW4377096738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.