ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Impact of the institutional model on psychiatric patients in Chile from the 19th to 21st centuries: a scoping review.
Article in Frontiers in 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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Various mental health hospital models have been tested in Chile since its foundation. The institutional model with the Asylum and the Madhouse prevailed during the nineteenth century and much of the twentieth. But is deinstitutionalizing all psychiatric patients the solution? Evidence acquisition: A PubMed, Epistemonikos, Lilacs, and Google Scholar Scoping Review was carried out in the last 5 years using the PRISMA-P method and the Scoping review search strategy. The MeSH terms ("Psychiatry/history" AND "Chile") OR ("Mental disorders" AND "therapy") were used during the search. Finally, papers focused on clinical trial therapy evaluation were excluded, and we emphasized the effects of historical evidence. Evidence synthesis: We identified 35 primary studies, and we counted the number of articles included in the review that potentially met our inclusion criteria and noted how many studies had been missed by our search. We analyzed 10 primary studies and 10 primary historical resources that were included in this study. Conclusion: The state must become a guarantor and be responsible for its psychiatric patients and provide professional and humanitarian support to its patients, be it through community psychiatry, day hospitals, devices such as mental health clinics, or psychiatric institutes dedicated to teaching and research. Patients should not be left to the free will of their direct relatives, but rather the state should strengthen the primary care system.
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.