Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40620175›Full record

ReviewCNS spectrums2025

Canadian mental health laws: a review of involuntary admission and treatment pending appeal.

Lyndal Christine Petit, Karen Shin, Nicole Fielding, Mathieu Dufour, John Gray

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in CNS spectrums, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Lyndal Christine PetitDepartment of Psychiatry https://ror.org/03dbr7087University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0001-5388-0844
Karen ShinDepartment of Psychiatry, https://ror.org/03dbr7087University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0009-8770-4214
Nicole FieldingCentre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0005-4248-0369
Mathieu DufourDepartment of Psychiatry and Addictions, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2584-5563
John GrayBritish Columbia Schizophrenia Society, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review article explores the legislative differences across Canadian jurisdictions with respect to involuntary admission and treatment pending appeal. Some jurisdictions restrict involuntary admission for mental illness to when there is a risk for serious bodily harm or physical impairment. However, the majority of jurisdictions recognize non-bodily harms or substantial mental or physical deterioration as grounds for involuntary admission when other criteria are met. Once a person is involuntarily admitted, jurisdictions differ on how treatment is authorized and whether treatment can commence while a person contests a finding of incapacity to treatment to the courts. Some jurisdictions permit treatment pending appeal while others do not. This article compares Canadian jurisdictions' mental health legislation and addresses discrepancies through the lens of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canada Health Act.

Indexed as

Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric DisordersMental DisordersMental HealthCanadaHumansCanadian mental health law reviewcapacitycompulsory admission and treatmenthealth equityinvoluntary admissionpsychiatrypsychologyschizophreniatreatment discontinuationtreatment pending appeal

Identifiers

PMID40620175
PMCPMC13064765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.