ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Between rights and reality: patient perceptions of social inclusion in a forensic psychiatric clinic implementing safewards.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Upholding human rights, including promoting patients' social inclusion, is essential in forensic psychiatric services to ensure socially sustainable development. Understanding how social inclusion it is perceived by patients is therefore important. Evidence suggests that the Safewards model can enhance social inclusion in inpatient settings. The aim of this study was to explore patients' perceptions of social inclusion in a forensic psychiatric clinic that implemented the Safewards model. To provide context, a secondary aim was to describe which Safewards interventions were implemented and how patients perceived them. Methods: Eight male patients from a forensic psychiatric clinic in Sweden were individually interviewed, focusing on Safewards and opportunities for social inclusion. Thematic content analysis was used to deductively code the data under the three core values of a social inclusion model: participation in decision-making, reciprocal relationships, and social justice. Themes for each value were thereafter developed inductively. For the secondary aim, a concise qualitative description was used to create an overview of patients' perceptions of Safewards. Results: Patients were aware of the Safewards interventions and were generally positive about them. Nine themes emerged: powerlessness when meeting the doctor; limited experience of involvement in daily decisions; desire to become involved in quality improvement efforts (participation in decision-making); staff members' availability and positive attitude; fellow patients exhibit care and consideration; withdrawal and avoidance of social interaction (reciprocal relationships); boredom and low mood within the ward; desire for dignified, equal, and safe care; and perception of unjustified confinement (social justice). Conclusion: The findings suggest that while Safewards may support more compassionate staff-patient relationships, it does not in itself ensure participatory or rights-based care. Achieving higher levels of social inclusion in forensic psychiatric services requires broader cultural and structural reforms beyond the implementation of individual models.
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.