Cited by 27Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsEthics and bioethics in healthcareHealth, Medicine and Society

Capacity to consent to treatment in psychiatry inpatients - a systematic review

Curley, Aoife, Watson, Carol, Kelly, Brendan D.·2022·International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mental capacity for treatment decisions in psychiatry inpatients is an important ethical and legal concern, especially in light of changes in mental capacity legislation in many jurisdictions. AIMS: To conduct a systematic review of literature examining the prevalence of mental capacity for treatment decisions among voluntary and involuntary psychiatry inpatients, and to assess any correlations between research tools used to measure mental capacity and binary judgements using criteria such as those in capacity legislation. METHOD: We searched PsycINFO, Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies assessing mental capacity for treatment decisions in people admitted voluntarily and involuntarily to psychiatric hospitals. RESULTS: Forty-five papers emanating from 33 studies were identified. There was huge variability in study methods and often selective populations, but the prevalence of decision-making capacity varied between 5% and 83.7%. These figures resulted from studies using cut-off scores or categorical criteria only. The prevalence of decision-making capacity among involuntary patients ranged from 7.7% to 42%, and among voluntary patients ranged from 29% to 97.9%. Two papers showed positive correlations between clinicians' judgement of decision-making capacity and scores on the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment; two papers showed no such correlation. CONCLUSIONS: Not all voluntary psychiatry inpatients possess mental capacity and many involuntary patients do. This paradox needs to be clarified and resolved in mental health legislation; supported decision-making can help with this task.Key PointsLegislative changes for mental capacity are taking place in many jurisdictions.This is an important human rights issue for many people, including psychiatry inpatients.In our review, we found the prevalence of decision-making capacity varies between 5% and 83.7% in psychiatry inpatients.Not all voluntary inpatients have decision-making capacity.Many involuntary inpatients have mental capacity to make decisions.Supported decision-making can help those with impairments in their mental capacity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13651501.2021.2017461

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 54 · Cited by 27

Authors
Curley, A., Watson, C., & Kelly, B. D.
Affiliations
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • Cavan Monaghan Mental Health Service, Monaghan, Ireland
Corresponding author
Curley, Aoife
Venue
International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice
Published
2021-12-23
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
303-315
ISSN
  • 1365-1501 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-1788
OpenAlex
W4200513464
Cited by
27
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
Keywords
decision-making capacity, treatment decision-making, psychiatric inpatients, voluntary admission, involuntary admission, supported decision-making
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Decision Making, Humans, Informed Consent, Inpatients, Psychiatry, 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