ArticleBJPsych open2026
When forensic psychiatry clashes with jurisdiction: nemesis and challenges of a patient suffering from glioblastoma.
Article in BJPsych open, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This case study explores the interaction of brain pathology, criminal behaviour and art in forensic psychiatry through the case of a 68-year-old man exhibiting neuropsychiatric symptoms and delusions. His progressive cognitive and emotional deterioration led to aggressive behaviour, threats towards colleagues and family and allegations of violent and sexual assault. After months of his refusing treatment, magnetic resonance imaging revealed a grade IV glioblastoma. Despite the terminal diagnosis, he was placed in a forensic acute psychiatric unit while under prosecutorial investigation, because his actions remained criminally relevant. In this restrictive setting, he turned to drawing as his primary coping strategy. His artwork offered both an outlet for suffering and a means of transcending a situation characterised by severe illness, legal deprivation of liberty and existential despair. The case illustrates the benefit of creative expression when medical and legal circumstances appear intractable. It also raises ethical and forensic concerns, including impaired culpability due to amygdala and prefrontal damage, refusal of care, thoughts of physician-assisted suicide and the attribution of legal responsibility.
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.