Cited by 24Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsMental Health and PsychiatryEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Regaining mental capacity for treatment decisions following psychiatric admission: A clinico-ethical study

Open access
Owen, G. S., Ster, I. Chis., David, A. S., Szmukler, G., Hayward, P., Richardson, G., Hotopf, M.·2011·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mental capacity is an emerging ethical legal concept in psychiatric settings but its relation to clinical parameters remains uncertain. We sought to investigate the associations of regaining capacity to make treatment decisions following approximately 1 month of in-patient psychiatric treatment. METHOD: We followed up 115 consecutive patients admitted to a psychiatric hospital who were judged to lack capacity to make treatment decisions at the point of hospitalization. We were primarily interested in whether the diagnosis of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder associated with reduced chances of regaining capacity compared with other diagnoses and whether affective symptoms on admission associated with increased chances of regaining capacity. In addition, we examined how change in insight was associated with regaining capacity in schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder (BPAD)-mania, and depression. RESULTS: We found evidence that the category of 'schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder' associated with not regaining capacity at 1 month compared with BPAD-mania [odds ratio (OR) 3.62, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.13-11.6] and depression (OR 5.35, 95% CI 1.47-9.55) and that affective symptoms on admission associated with regaining capacity (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.48). In addition, using an interaction model, we found some evidence that gain in insight may not be a good indicator of regaining capacity in patients with depression compared with patients with schizophrenia and BPAD-mania. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that clinico-ethical studies using mental capacity provide a way of assessing the validity of nosological and other clinical concepts in psychiatry.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291710000383

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Black patients were significantly less likely to regain capacity for treatment decisions, compared to White patients (OR = 0.29, 95% CI [0.11 -0.74]).

    “Black patients were significantly less likely to regain capacity for treatment decisions, compared to White patients (OR = 0.29, 95% CI [0.11 -0.74]).”

    From Decision making capacity for treatment in psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as G. S. Owen et al., 2011

    The Results (Descriptive data; page unavailable) report that a greater percentage of Black patients did not regain capacity, supporting the direction of the claim. The paper calls this an apparent difference and says the numbers were too small for further analysis; our copy does not support the asserted statistical significance, odds ratio, or confidence interval. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Two studies found that Black ethnicity was associated with poorer capacity, compared to White European ethnicity.

    “Regarding ethnicity, two studies found that Black ethnicity was associated with poorer capacity, compared to White European ethnicity (G. S. Owen et al., 2008Owen et al., , 2011)).”

    From Decision making capacity for treatment in psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as G. S. Owen et al., 2011

    The Results (Descriptive data; page unavailable) report that a greater percentage of Black patients did not regain capacity, but call the difference only apparent: potential confounders were numerous and the numbers too small for further analysis. The passage does not specify White European patients as the comparator. This paper therefore supports a cautious observation about regaining capacity, not the claim's unqualified association with poorer capacity. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In general, the included studies suggest that psychiatric symptoms are associated with incapacity.

    “In general, the included studies suggest that psychiatric symptoms are also associated with incapacity (G. S. Owen et al., 2011).”

    From Decision making capacity for treatment in psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as G. S. Owen et al., 2011

    The Results (Univariate analysis) find an association between affective symptoms on admission and regaining capacity, which supports a link between some psychiatric symptoms and capacity. They find no association for psychotic symptom scores, however, and the study examines regaining capacity among patients initially judged to lack it—not a general association between psychiatric symptoms and incapacity. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Across inpatients, poor insight was a consistent and strong predictor of incapacity.

    “Across inpatients, poor insight was also a consistent and strong predictor of incapacity (G.Owen et al., 2009;G. S. Owen et al., 2011;Seo et al., 2011;Skipworth et al., 2013;Spencer et al., 2018)”

    From Decision making capacity for treatment in psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as G. S. Owen et al., 2011

    The Discussion says insight is closely associated with capacity in general psychiatric inpatient studies, and the Results report an association between change in insight and regaining capacity. But the Discussion explicitly says insight is not a good indicator of capacity for patients with depression, so the source does not support calling poor insight a consistent, strong predictor across all inpatients. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Black African and Black Caribbean patients were significantly less likely to have capacity to make treatment decisions.

    “More specifically, Black African (OR = 0.14, 95% CI [0.05 -0.37]) and Black Caribbean (OR = 0.32, 95% CI [0.13 -0.78]) patients were significantly less likely to have capacity to make treatment decisions.”

    From Decision making capacity for treatment in psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as G. S. Owen et al., 2011

    The Results (Descriptive data; page unavailable) report an apparent difference: a greater percentage of patients with black ethnicity did not regain capacity after admission. The paper does not distinguish Black African from Black Caribbean patients or report the cited odds ratios; it says the numbers were too small for further analysis. Its outcome is regaining capacity, not simply having capacity to make treatment decisions. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Owen GS David AS Richardson G Szmuker G Hayward P Hotopf M Mental capacity, diagnosis and insight Psychological Medicine 2009 39 1389 1398 18940026 PMC7611628
  2. PsychCorp Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence - Manual PsychCorp Oxford, UK 1999

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Owen, G. S., Ster, I. C., David, A. S., Szmukler, G., Hayward, P., Richardson, G., & Hotopf, M.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Owen, G. S.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2010-03-29
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
119-128
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2133963804
Cited by
24
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
1.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (MAUBRC-2012-1, NF-SI-0507-10088)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
decision-making capacity, treatment decision-making, psychiatric inpatients, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, depression, insight, affective symptoms, psychiatric ethics, disease classification
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Bipolar Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Inpatients, Male, Psychiatric Department, Hospital, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotic Disorders, Remission Induction, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Time Factors, Confidence Intervals, Logistic Models, Odds Ratio, Mental Competency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review