ArticlePCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2025
Global psychiatrists' opinions about
Article in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A structured support process for social reintegration of a patient with long-term hikikomori: A case report.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026Article
- Urban mental health, hikikomori, and modern-Type depression.Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2026Review
- Hikikomori in the urban digital era: a psychodynamic, transdiagnostic model and multimodal interventions.Current opinion in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Parental bonding and attachment in the hikikomori trajectory.Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026Article
- Global psychiatrists' opinions aboutPCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate whether psychiatrists around the world believe they might encounter cases of Methods: A Results: In total, 344 complete responses from 34 countries were returned. Eight countries/areas had 10 or more respondents: Japan (61), South Korea (54), Nepal (48), Iran (40), Thailand (32), India (23), Hong Kong (12), and UK (10); the remainder were placed in the "others" group (64). Respondents from all countries except Thailand felt that similar cases were seen. Diverse patterns of response were obtained regarding formulation and treatment. Japan, South Korea, and "others" favored psychosocial aspects in the formulation, while Iran, Nepal, and India favored biological factors. Most respondents felt the case could be treated by an outpatient visit, while others preferred hospitalization. Psychotherapy was rated highly as an intervention; Iran, South Korea, and "others" also rated pharmacotherapy highly. Conclusion: Despite its limitations as an exploratory study, we found evidence that
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.