Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39714025›Full record

ReviewCNS spectrums2024

Dignity restored: the power of treatment first.

Jhilam Biswas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in CNS spectrums, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Jhilam BiswasDepartment of Psychiatry, Mass General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2498-2585

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The perspective article explores systemic issues in psychiatric care, particularly the barriers to timely treatment and the ethical dilemmas involved in involuntary interventions. It further examines the impact of anosognosia-lack of disease insight-on treatment, noting the difficulties in managing care for those unaware of their illness, and scrutinizes training materials from international organizations that might mislabel necessary psychiatric practices as human rights violations, thereby complicating the care landscape. The discussion extends to the legal and societal implications of psychiatric interventions, using Massachusetts' Rogers Guardianship as a case study to highlight the consequences of legalistic approaches to mental health treatment.The article calls for destigmatizing psychiatric treatment and integrating robust, evidence-based practices to improve patient outcomes and healthcare equity. The global mental health policy landscape is urged to recognize the critical role of psychiatric care in restoring health and dignity to individuals with serious mental illnesses, advocating for a more nuanced understanding and application of human rights in mental health.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersPersonhoodHuman RightsHumansanosognosiaantipsychotic medicationglobal mental healthhealthcare burnouthealth equitypsychiatric commitmentRogers Guardianshipsubstituted judgment

Identifiers

PMID39714025
PMCPMC13064775

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.