Cited by 90Mental Health Treatment and AccessDiversity and Career in MedicineHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Images of psychiatry and psychiatrists

Open access
Stuart, H., Sartorius, N., Liinamaa, T., the Images Study Group·2015·Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract

Objective: This study surveyed medical teaching faculty to determine their attitudes toward psychiatry and psychiatrists. Method: We conducted a multisite survey of a probability sample of 1057 teaching medical faculty members from 15 academic teaching centers in the United Kingdom, Europe, and Asia stratified by early, middle, and late career stage. The average response rate across countries was 65%. Results: The outstanding findings were that 90% of respondents considered that psychiatrists were not good role models for medical students, 84% thought psychiatric patients were unsuitable to be treated outside of specialized facilities, and 73% thought psychiatric patients were emotionally draining. We noted statistically significant differences by country, gender, career stage, and specialty. Conclusion: These results highlight why recruitment into psychiatry is problematic in many countries and suggest that greater attention should be given to improving the perception of psychiatrists as good role models and the efficacy of psychiatric treatments.

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 · 10.1111/acps.12368

Cites

30 of 30 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stuart, H., Sartorius, N., Liinamaa, T., & the Images Study Group
Affiliations
  • Queen's University (CA)
  • Association for the Improvement of Mental Health Programs Geneva Switzerland
Corresponding author
Stuart, H.
Venue
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-12-14
Volume
131
Issue
1
Pages
21-28
ISSN
  • 0001-690X (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0447
OpenAlex
W2007898789
Cited by
90
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 10
FWCI
16.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
Foundation for the Improvement of Mental Health Programs (n/a)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
attitudes toward psychiatry, psychiatric patients, career stages, gender differences, cross-national comparison
MeSH terms
Asia, Attitude of Health Personnel, Career Choice, Europe, Faculty, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Psychiatry, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Distribution

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