ArticleBMJ open2025
Patients' and informal carers' insights into influences on prescribing in borderline personality disorder: a qualitative interview study in the UK.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the patient and informal-carer reported factors that influence prescribing decisions in the management of borderline personality disorder (BPD).
designThe study employed a qualitative methodology of semi-structured interviews with patients and informal carers to examine perspectives on prescribing decisions and the factors shaping them.
settingInterviews were conducted across both primary and secondary care settings in England.
participantsA total of 10 participants were recruited for the study, comprising eight females and two males, all aged 18 years or older. Participants either had a formal diagnosis of BPD or were informal carers of individuals diagnosed with BPD. All participants had experience with the prescribing of medication for the management of BPD.
resultsThematic analysis, employing both inductive and deductive strategies and informed by agency theory, yielded three interrelated themes: prescribing for symptom relief, the impact of risk on prescribing and difficulties in accessing services. Participants described medication as a necessary means of managing distress, especially when access to psychological therapies was constrained. Despite awareness of potential adverse effects, many expressed a strong desire to make their own decision around medication.
conclusionsImproving clarity around the likelihood of both symptomatic relief and potential adverse effects through co-designed informational resources may support more informed decision-making in the treatment of BPD. Furthermore, to change prescribing patterns, systemic gaps in the provision of long-term psychological therapies must be addressed.
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.