ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2026
Legislative differences in compulsory mental health care for children and adolescents across European countries.
Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is growing concern about the protection of children's rights in compulsory psychiatric care. To examine procedural and legal variations in compulsory mental health care for children and adolescents across European nations, the European Society for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (ESCAP) commissioned this study. A structured questionnaire was developed using Google Forms and distributed via email to representatives of all 36 ESCAP member countries. The survey gathered information on legislation, commitment criteria, and procedural requirements for compulsory mental health care in minors. Data were analysed qualitatively to identify common themes and notable legislative differences. A total of 35 responses were received, covering 24 countries. 29% of participating countries reported child-specific legislation for involuntary hospitalisation of minors, with key differences from adult legislation concerning commitment criteria, involvement of legal guardians, and considerations regarding minors' capacity to consent to treatment. A mental disorder diagnosis is required for involuntary admission in 88% of countries, with 52% of those countries specifying severe mental disorder. Further, 71% of countries require that the person pose a danger to themselves or others. The legal age of consent for treatment varies widely (12-18 years), with 92% of countries allowing appeals against involuntary hospitalisation by the minor or their guardians. The observed legislative disparities underscore the varied approaches to compulsory mental health care for minors in Europe, suggesting a need for developing shared guidelines to promote equitable and effective care across countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42340380What 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.