ArticlePLOS mental health2025
A co-produced review of the experiences of Black male detention under mental health legislation: Challenging discrimination in psychiatry using The Silences Framework.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- More coercion, less support: A latent class analysis of post-incident reviews for mental health inpatients exposed to coercive practice.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Stigma, race, and testimonial injustice in mental health detention: Professionals experience of Compulsory Assessment and Treatment under The Mental Health Act 1983.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- From mental health detention to health systems reform: Co-producing policy and practice recommendations with Black men, their communities, and health and social care professionals.PLOS mental health · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The number of detentions under mental health legislation is growing, disproportionately impacting Black men. Previous research into the over-detention of Black people is repetitive and solutions to reduce disparities are ineffective, not enacted, or outdated. This review is original and novel in using a lived experience lens within the Silences framework, to interpret and validate review findings and make actionable recommendations to enable change, reduce Black men's detention rates and improve experiences. The systematic review searched three databases: EBSCO, ProQuest, and PMC. Search terms included: ethnicity: Black African Caribbean; gender: male; and detention: detained under mental health legislation. Searches were conducted in September 2021 and February 2024 and included papers from 2000 to 2024. The review was conducted using the NIHR systematic review protocol. Searches resulted in 15,300 papers, which were reduced to 34 papers for inclusion in the thematic analysis. People with lived experience on the review team explored the Silences missing in the literature and co-developed the findings and recommendations. Three themes were developed and are presented as 'Screaming Silences' - a concept that amplifies what is known (by patients, family and friends, professionals, and others), but is not explicitly discussed within literature: (1) contextual identity; (2) culture, spirituality, and religion; and (3) power, language, and communication. People with lived experience discussed what these themes meant to them. Their views are key to flipping the narrative, and support change for Black men compulsorily detained in mental health settings. Findings show that academic understanding of the detrimental treatment and care of Black men has barely changed in twenty years. The recommendations centre on: patient involvement and clear communication; reducing disparities through anti-discriminatory policies and practice; the promotion of cultural competence; community campaigns, collaboration, and support for carers; monitoring and auditing; and improving future research through co-production.
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.