Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38001564›Full record

ArticleThe International journal of social psychiatry2024

The views of psychiatrists on proposed changes to the England and Wales Mental Health Act 1983 legislation for people with intellectual disability: A national study.

Samuel Tromans, Gemma Robinson, Alexandra Gabrielsson, Paul Bassett, Indermeet Sawhney, Paraskevi Triantafyllopoulou, Angela Hassiotis, Rohit Shankar

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The International journal of social psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Samuel TromansDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, UK.
Gemma RobinsonForensic Community Learning Disability Team, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Calmore, UK.
Alexandra GabrielssonHertfordshire Partnership University NHS Trust, Hatfield, UK.
Paul BassettStatsconsultancy Ltd, Bucks, UK.
Indermeet SawhneyHertfordshire Partnership University NHS Trust, Hatfield, UK.
Paraskevi TriantafyllopoulouTizard Centre, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Angela HassiotisUniversity College London, UK.
Rohit ShankarUniversity of Plymouth Peninsula School of Medicine, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1183-6933
Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust · GBCornwall Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GBSouthern Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Kent · GBUniversity of Leicester · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Draft Mental Health Bill proposes removal of both intellectual disability and autism from Section 3 of the Mental Health Act for England and Wales (MHA). This would lead to people with intellectual disability (PwID) and/or autism could not be detained beyond 28 days, in the absence of diagnosed co-occurring mental illness.

aimTo obtain views of psychiatrists working with PwID in England and Wales regarding the proposed MHA changes. This study focusses specifically on the impact on PwID.

methodsA cross-sectional online mixed methodology survey of Likert and free-text response questions was developed, to ascertain perceptions of proposed legislative changes to the MHA. A non-discriminatory exponential snowballing technique leading to non-probability sampling was used to disseminate the survey. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact tests. Thematic analysis was conducted on free text responses.

resultsA total of 82 psychiatrists (33%) from approximately 250 eligible completed the survey. Nearly two-thirds (64%) reported good awareness of the proposed changes, with over half (55%) reporting disagreement with the changes. Psychiatrists working in inpatient settings for PwID reported increased awareness of the changes, less agreement with the reforms, and increased expectations of the reforms having negative unintended consequences, compared to their peers working exclusively in the community. Consultants reported greater disagreement with the changes compared to their non-consultant peers. Qualitative analysis identified five main themes: impact on diagnosis and treatment, seeking alternative options, introducing inequities, resources, and meeting holistic care goals through the Care, Education and Treatment Reviews (CETR) process.

conclusionPsychiatrists working with PwID report widespread disagreement with the proposed changes to the MHA for PwID, with greater levels of disagreement among those working in inpatient services. Caution with respect to the proposed changes, and monitoring of the impact of the changes if implemented, is advised.

Indexed as

Intellectual DisabilitySubstance Abuse, IntravenousCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMental HealthPsychiatristsWalesbehaviours that challengedetentiondevelopmental disabilitymental disordersMental Health Actsectioning

Identifiers

PMID38001564
PMCPMC10913297
OpenAlexW4389001925

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.