ReviewBMC psychiatry2021
The role of trust and hope in antipsychotic medication reviews between GPs and service users a realist review.
Review in BMC psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The silent struggle of ageing with SMI: a narrative review of physical health disparities in older adults with serious mental illness.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026Review
- Non-pharmacologicaL InterVEntions for Antipsychotic-Induced Weight Gain (RESOLVE) in People Living With Severe Mental Illness: A Realist Synthesis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025Review
- Behind the Gaps: A Narrative Review of Healthcare Barriers for Individuals with Serious Mental Illness.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Interdisciplinary medication reviews of psychiatric patients - A mixed method evaluation.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Proactive Deprescribing Among Older Adults With Polypharmacy: Barriers and Enablers.Annals of family medicine · 2025Article
- Attitudes of Australian patients receiving inpatient mental health care towards deprescribing: a cross-sectional survey.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Antipsychotic management in general practice: serial cross-sectional study (2011-2020).The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- A realist review of medication optimisation of community dwelling service users with serious mental illness.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Review
- Advisory groups in realist reviews: Systematically mapping current research and recommendations for practice.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Review
- Transmural collaborative care model for the review of antipsychotics: a feasibility study of a complex intervention.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Management of antipsychotics in primary care: Insights from healthcare professionals and policy makers in the United Kingdom.PloS one · 2024Article
- The role of pharmacists in supporting service users to optimise antipsychotic medication.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Primary care and bipolar disorder.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing number of service users diagnosed with schizophrenia and psychosis are being discharged from specialist secondary care services to primary care, many of whom are prescribed long-term antipsychotics. It is unclear if General Practitioners (GPs) have the confidence and experience to appropriately review and adjust doses of antipsychotic medication without secondary care support.
aimTo explore barriers and facilitators of conducting antipsychotic medication reviews in primary care for individuals with no specialist mental health input. DESIGN &
settingRealist review in general practice settings.
methodA realist review has been conducted to synthesise evidence on antipsychotic medication reviews conducted in primary care with service users diagnosed with schizophrenia or psychosis. Following initial scoping searches and discussions with stakeholders, a systematic search and iterative secondary searches were conducted. Articles were systematically screened and analysed to develop a realist programme theory explaining the contexts (C) and mechanisms (M) which facilitate or prevent antipsychotic medication reviews (O) in primary care settings, and the potential outcomes of medication reviews.
resultsMeaningful Antipsychotic medication reviews may not occur for individuals with only primary care medical input. Several, often mutually reinforcing, mechanisms have been identified as potential barriers to conducting such reviews, including low expectations of recovery for people with severe mental illness, a perceived lack of capability to understand and participate in medication reviews, linked with a lack of information shared in appointments between GPs and Service Users, perceived risk and uncertainty regarding antipsychotic medication and illness trajectory.
conclusionsThe review identified reciprocal and reinforcing stereotypes affecting both GPs and service users. Possible mechanisms to counteract these barriers are discussed, including realistic expectations of medication, and the need for increased information sharing and trust between GPs and service users.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.