ArticleCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2024
Article in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2024. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAmbulatory care without consent is widely used, but it is controversial, and its effectiveness has not yet been proven. The patient experience remains largely unstudied in France, particularly that of young patients, yet their adherence to care in the early stages of the disease is complex and has an impact on their prognoses. The aim of this study is to investigate the experience of young patients undergoing a program of care (POC) in order to suggest ways of optimizing their care and to enrich the debate on the use of POCs.
methodSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients between ages 20 and 32, who were either undergoing a POC or had done so in the previous 5 years, followed by a semi-pragmatic phenomenological analysis of the resulting transcripts.
results(1) The outpatient experience with restraints is contradictory, ranging from deprivation and intrusion to support and protection. (2) The POC is portrayed as a framework for developing awareness of disorders and acceptance of care. (3) Patients report a lack of information about care with restraints, even to the point of being unaware of its existence. Patient-psychiatrist interactions within the POC are complicated by the restraints, but remain perceived as a care relationship. (4) They report constraints in their daily lives in connection to the POC, which can complicate professional involvement.
conclusionThe results support the importance of nurturing the therapeutic relationship within the POC and involving patients more in their care, starting with better information. They support the use of POCs as a temporary tool to be combined with work on adherence to treatment and support for social and professional reintegration. SPECIALTY: Psychiatry.
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.