ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
When Doing Nothing Feels Safer: A Multilevel Framework for Therapeutic Inertia in Psychiatry.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Therapeutic inertia has been extensively examined in chronic medical conditions but remains insufficiently conceptualized and empirically studied in psychiatry. This structured narrative review examines therapeutic inertia as a multilevel and potentially bidirectional phenomenon arising when clinically relevant care is not reconsidered or modified despite unmet therapeutic goals and the availability of a reasonable and feasible alternative. A targeted PubMed search was supplemented by backward and forward citation searching, prioritizing psychiatric evidence and foundational literature on clinical decision-making under uncertainty. The review distinguishes therapeutic inertia from appropriate caution, watchful waiting, informed refusal, structural non-access, therapeutic nihilism, medical futility, therapeutic obstinacy, and evidence-based deprescribing. Potential determinants include cognitive and emotional mechanisms, diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty, adverse-effect concerns, patient preferences and previous experiences, therapeutic relationships, resource constraints, fragmented care, guideline structures, workload, and medicolegal culture. Clozapine underutilization in treatment-resistant schizophrenia represents the most compelling psychiatric example, while direct but more limited evidence is available in major depressive and bipolar disorders; applications to anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, substance-use, and non-pharmacological care remain largely hypothesis-generating. Strategies include explicit therapeutic goals, planned reassessment, measurement-based and guideline-informed care, shared decision-making, multidisciplinary review, improved access, clinical decision support, and audit and feedback. Future research should use operational definitions, experimental and observational designs, patient-centered outcomes, and real-world data to determine when treatment non-modification is inappropriate and whether corrective interventions improve care without promoting indiscriminate escalation, coercion, polypharmacy, or premature discontinuation.
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.