Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42340380›Full record

ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2026

Legislative differences in compulsory mental health care for children and adolescents across European countries.

Tjaša Vranetič, Konsta Hakala, Jörg M Fegert, Maja Drobnič Radobuljac, Riittakerttu Kaltiala, Robert Vermeiren, Astrid Moell, ESCAP coercion and restraint consortium

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

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

8 authors.

Tjaša VranetičUniversity Medical Centre Ljubljana, Child Psychiatry Unit, University Children's Hospital, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-8975-3572
Konsta HakalaFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-1966-6133
Jörg M FegertDepartment for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6070-4323
Maja Drobnič RadobuljacUniversity of Ljubljana, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8632-9725
Riittakerttu KaltialaFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2783-3892
Robert VermeirenChild and Adolescent Psychiatry, University of Leiden, LUMC-Curium, Oegstgeest, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8673-2207
Astrid MoellCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Region Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden. astrid.moell@ki.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1185-711X
ESCAP coercion and restraint consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Child and adolescent psychiatryCoercionCompulsory mental health careInvoluntary hospitalisationMental health legislation

Identifiers

PMID42340380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.