ReviewBJPsych bulletin2024
Excluding autism or excluding everything? The problem of broad definitions in the England and Wales Draft Mental Health Bill.
Review in BJPsych bulletin, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Mental Health Bill (2025) for England and Wales: professional and carer consensus statement summarising concerns and unintended consequences from proposed changes to autism and learning disability.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent Draft Mental Health Bill for England and Wales proposes changes to the Mental Health Act 1983 which will include, for the first time, a legal definition of autism. This article explores the specific potential issue that the definition, owing to its breadth, potentially encompasses a number of conditions other than autism, consequently leaving the definitionally dependent concept of 'psychiatric disorder' significantly narrowed in scope. The potential implications of this - primarily the concern that a range of other conditions and presentations could be unintentionally excluded from the scope of the civil powers in the Mental Health Act - 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.