Cited by 2Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsPsychiatric care and mental health servicesElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies

Perceived coercion in psychiatric inpatients: a validation study of the Romanian-language version of the Admission Experience Survey

Open access
Păun, Radu-Mihai, Pavel, Neculai Alexandru, Matei, Valentin-Petre, Tudose, Cătălina·2026·Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

Abstract

The MacArthur Admission Experience Survey was developed to evaluate perceived coercion in psychiatric inpatients and comprises of three subscales: "Perceived coercion", "Negative pressures" and "Voice". The present study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of a Romanian language version of the AES (R-AES) and to identify predictors for higher perceived coercion. We developed the R-AES using a translation/back-translation procedure and administered it to 137 patients admitted to the "Profesor Doctor Alexandru Obregia" psychiatric hospital in Bucharest, Romania. Discriminatory power was evaluated by comparing the scores of voluntarily and involuntarily admitted patients. The R-AES showed satisfactory internal consistency (Crohnbach's alpha = 0.92). Principal components analysis disclosed a three-factor solution explaining 69.1% of variance. Factor components roughly corresponded to the original subscales. Higher scores were associated with involuntary admission, objective coercive measures, younger age, frequent past hospitalisations, treatment non-compliance, psychosis, mania, greater disease severity, aggression, and presentation by police or ambulance.

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 · 10.1080/13218719.2024.2372767

Cites

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?

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 24 · Cited by 2

Authors
Păun, R.-M., Pavel, N. A., Matei, V.-P., & Tudose, C.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychiatry, ‘Carol Davila’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy
  • Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy (RO)
Corresponding author
Matei, Valentin-Petre
Venue
Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
Published
2024-09-08
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
22-31
ISSN
  • 1321-8719 (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-1687
OpenAlex
W4402384277
Cited by
2
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Psychology and Law (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Keywords
perceived coercion, psychiatric inpatients, psychometric validation, involuntary admission, treatment non-adherence, psychosis, mania, aggression, hospitalization

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