Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39201112›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024

A Scoping Review on Staff Attitudes towards the Use of Coercion in Mental Healthcare.

Simone Agnes Efkemann, Jakub Lickiewicz, Paul Doedens, Tella Lantta, Panagiota Bali, Tonje Lossius Husum

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

6 authors.

Simone Agnes EfkemannDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Preventive Medicine, LWL University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 44791 Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0611-4247
Jakub LickiewiczDepartment of Health Psychology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, 31-501 Krakow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7371-0204
Paul DoedensDepartment of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6620-3455
Tella LanttaDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7715-7573
Panagiota BaliSecond Department of Psychiatry, Medical School, University General Hospital "Attikon", National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Chaidari, Greece.
Tonje Lossius HusumFaculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, 0130 Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-0151-1262

Funding

European Cooperation in Science and Technology COST Action FOSTREN CA19133_MoU
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attitudes of mental health professionals towards the use of coercion are highly relevant concerning its use coercion in mental healthcare, as mental health professionals have to weigh ethical arguments and decide within a legal frame in which situations to use coercion or not. Therefore, assessment of those attitudes is relevant for research in this field. A vital instrument to measure those attitudes towards the use of coercion is the Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale. This scoping review aims to provide a structured overview of the advantages and limitations in the assessment of attitudes toward coercion. We conducted a scoping review in Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science, based on the PRISMA-ScR. Inclusion criteria were empirical studies on the attitudes of mental health professionals. We included 80 studies and systematically mapped data about the main results and limitations in assessing attitudes toward coercion. The main results highlighted the relevance and increased interest in staff attitudes towards coercion in mental healthcare. Still, the majority of the included studies relied on a variety of different concepts and definitions concerning attitudes. The data further indicated difficulties in developing new and adapting existing assessment instruments because of the equivocal definitions of underlying concepts. To improve the research and knowledge in this area, future studies should be based on solid theoretical foundations. We identified the need for methodological changes and standardized procedures that take into account existing evidence from attitude research in social psychology, nursing science, and other relevant research fields. This would include an update of the Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale based on the limitations identified in this review.

Indexed as

attitude of health personnelcoercionmental health servicespsychiatrySACSsocial psychology

Identifiers

PMID39201112
PMCPMC11354183

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.