Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42051791›Full record

ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2026

Psychiatry without thresholds: Ethical and clinical lessons from low-triage systems.

Ashok Seervi, Indraja Sharma

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Ashok SeerviPsychiatry, Dr. S.N. Medical College, Jodhpur, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2577-7633
Indraja SharmaPsychiatry, Pacific Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychiatric practice in high-income countries typically relies on implicit triage pathways that filter patients through primary and stepped care before specialist review. In many low- and middle-income settings, however, psychiatrists manage the entire spectrum of distress without such filters. This absence reshapes hierarchies of severity, alters diagnostic and ethical reasoning and influences how clinical priority is determined. Drawing on practice realities from India, this article argues that severity in such systems becomes a dynamic and socially negotiated construct rather than a fixed clinical category. Without institutional thresholds, urgency may become performative: social visibility, family advocacy and the ability to articulate distress can influence prioritization more than clinical need, producing a pattern of reverse triage, in which socially mediated visibility displaces genuine urgency. Language compatibility may further intensify this dynamic, as patients unable to communicate in the clinician's working language risk remaining unheard in undifferentiated clinical spaces. As mental health systems worldwide face rising demand and limited capacity, these observations highlight triage not as exclusion but as an ethical mechanism for balancing equity of access with fairness of prioritization.

Indexed as

discriminationhealth care systemhealth deliverylow-income countriespsychiatrist

Identifiers

PMID42051791
PMCPMC13112278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.