ArticleEuropean psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists2026
Abolition of coercion in psychiatry on the horizon? A descriptive ecologic data study from six European countries.
Article in European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- How does European mental health legislation promote autonomy for those in involuntary care? A comparative descriptive analysis of 27 countries.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026Article
- Coercive measures in psychiatry: consensus and controversy in Swiss professional discourse.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the last decade, UN bodies and the WHO call for the abolition of coercion in psychiatry. Studies provide some evidence for interventions to reduce the use of coercion, but it is unclear whether the use of coercion is decreasing in real-world practice. The aim of this study was to gather longitudinal ecologic data on the use of coercive interventions in European countries and to depict trends over time.
methodsFor each country, inclusion required access to ecologic datasets spanning a minimum of four years, pertain to a defined population (country or federal state level), and allowing the necessary elements to calculate both the proportion of psychiatric admissions affected by involuntary admissions (IAs) and coercive measures (CMs) and the rate per 100,000 inhabitants. Country experts were accessed via a European network of experts (FOSTREN group).
resultsData were obtained from Austria, England, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, and covered periods between 4 and 10 years. In no country, an absolute decrease in IA and the use of CM could be observed. Rates of IA per 100,000 inhabitants changed between -5.4% (Sweden) and +37% (Germany). Rates of admissions exposed to any kind of CM changed between +11% (Austria) and +86% (Norway).
conclusionsThe findings suggest a persistence or rise in coercive practices despite national and international policy commitments. An increase in involuntary admissions suggests reasons outside psychiatric hospitals, whereas a disproportionate increase in coercive measures may indicate a change of practice in in-patient psychiatry. Further research is needed to explore the reasons from clinical and societal perspectives.
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.