Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39506102›Full record

ArticleNpj mental health research2024

Explaining key stakeholders' preferences for potential policies governing psychiatric electroceutical intervention use.

Aaron M McCright, Eric D Achtyes, Robyn Bluhm, Laura Y Cabrera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Npj mental health research, 2024. 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

4 authors.

Aaron M McCrightDepartment of Sociology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. mccright@msu.edu.
Eric D AchtyesDepartment of Psychiatry, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.
Robyn BluhmDepartment of Philosophy and Lyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Laura Y CabreraCenter for Neural Engineering, Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, and Rock Ethics Institute, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.

Funding

Is the Treatment Perceived to be Worse than the Disease?: Ethical Concerns and Attitudes towards Psychiatric Electroceutical InterventionsRF1MH117802 · NIMH · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI CABRERA TRUJILLO, LAURA YENISA · 2018 to 2018
$1.3M
NIH HHS 1RF1MH117802-01NIMH NIH HHS RF1 MH117802
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, legislators in many states have proposed laws governing the use of psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs), which use electrical or magnetic stimulation to treat mental disorders. To examine how the PEI views of relevant stakeholder groups (e.g., psychiatrists, patients, caregivers, and general public) relate to preferences for proposed policies governing PEI use, we analyze data from a survey on using one of four PEIs to treat major depressive disorder administered to national samples of the stakeholder groups above. We find that the three non-clinician groups' similar PEI policy preferences differ significantly from those of psychiatrists-with the greatest divide on policies governing the use of electroconvulsive therapy. This divide between psychiatrists' and non-clinicians' PEI policy preferences was greater with access-reducing than with access-expanding policies. We advise policymakers to consider such variation in the preferred availability of PEIs across modalities and stakeholder groups when crafting legislation on these interventions.

Identifiers

PMID39506102
PMCPMC11542036

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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 Socratic graph.