Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40438335›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2025

Measuring patient satisfaction with mental health services in correctional settings: a systematic scoping review.

Roland M Jones, Niroshini Mather, M Umer Waqar, Madleina Manetsch, Chloe Taylor, Vito Adamo, Marco Kilada, Cory Gerritsen, Alexander I F Simpson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. 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. Methods and tools used to assess patient experience with healthcare services in prisons: a scoping review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    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

9 authors.

Roland M JonesForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Niroshini MatherForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
M Umer WaqarForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Madleina ManetschForensic Psychiatric Clinic, Psychiatric University Hospitals, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Chloe TaylorForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Vito AdamoForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marco KiladaForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Cory GerritsenForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Alexander I F SimpsonForensic Psychiatry Division, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The measurement of patient satisfaction with mental health services is well-established and a key indicator of performance. Patient satisfaction with mental health services received in criminal justice settings however is however less frequently studied. Our aim was to establish how frequently patient satisfaction with mental health services in correctional (prison) settings is being reported, and to identify methods of measurement including all tools that have been used to measure patient satisfaction in these settings. Methods: A comprehensive search of published articles and thesis dissertations was undertaken using multiple databases. Two reviewers independently screened the references to determine eligibility and then extracted the necessary data using a predefined extraction template. Only studies that measured patient satisfaction with a mental health service or intervention within a correctional facility were included. Results: 46 studies, which included various measures, were identified as being eligible for inclusion. The median number of patients involved in these studies was 37.5 (range: 4-1150). Tools were heterogeneous in length, purpose, and design, and these measured a variety of different domains. Most of the tools used had been developed in non-correctional settings and applied in correctional settings without adaptation. Tools with established psychometric properties were used only in ten instances, whereas the majority of the studies reported using author-developed interviews and questionnaires to obtain feedback. Conclusion: Patient satisfaction measurement tools in correctional services are heterogeneous and largely unvalidated; there is no uniformity in the measurement methods used. Systematic Review Registration: https://osf.io/md8vp, identifier md8vp.

Indexed as

correctional psychiatryforensic psychiatryincarcerationmental healthpatient satisfactionscoping review

Identifiers

PMID40438335
PMCPMC12117829

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.