ArticleThe British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science2026
Characteristics of people with severe mental illness excluded from incentivised physical health checks in the UK: electronic healthcare record study.
Article in The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Weight loss prior to diagnosis of first-episode psychosis predicts subsequent weight gain: a retrospective cohort study of the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) primary care database.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
- Changes in trends of visits and service utilization by mental health patients in the community: a twelve-year study in Israel.Israel journal of health policy research · 2025Observational
- Tirzepatide and the NHS: are we creating a two-tier obesity treatment system?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhysical health checks in primary care for people with severe mental illness ((SMI) defined as schizophrenia, bipolar disorders and non-organic psychosis) aim to reduce health inequalities. Patients who decline or are deemed unsuitable for screening are removed from the denominator used to calculate incentivisation, termed exception reporting.
aimsTo describe the prevalence of, and patient characteristics associated with, exception reporting in patients with SMI.
methodWe identified adult patients with SMI from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), registered with a general practice between 2004 and 2018. We calculated the annual prevalence of exception reporting and investigated patient characteristics associated with exception reporting, using logistic regression.
resultsOf 193 850 patients with SMI, 27.7% were exception reported from physical health checks at least once. Exception reporting owing to non-response or declining screening increased over the study period. Patients of Asian or Black ethnicity (Asian: odds ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.80; Black: odds ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.76-0.97; compared with White) and women (odds ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.88-0.92) had a reduced odds of being exception reported, whereas patients diagnosed with 'other psychoses' (odds ratio 1.19, 95% CI 1.15-1.23; compared with bipolar disorder) had increased odds. Younger patients and those diagnosed with schizophrenia were more likely to be exception reported owing to informed dissent.
conclusionsException reporting was common in people with SMI. Interventions are required to improve accessibility and uptake of physical health checks to improve physical health in people with SMI.
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.