↓ Skip to main content

Perceived coercion to enter treatment among involuntarily and voluntarily admitted patients with substance use disorders

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perceived coercion to enter treatment among involuntarily and voluntarily admitted patients with substance use disorders
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1906-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Opsal, Øistein Kristensen, John Kåre Vederhus, Thomas Clausen

Abstract

Perceived coercion is a sense of pressure related to the experience of being referred to treatment. The sense of pressure arises from the patient's internal perception of coercion. The sources of coercion may be the legal system, the family, the health system, or self-criticism (internal sources). Here, we studied patients diagnosed with substance use disorders that were involuntarily admitted to hospital, pursuant to a social services act. We sought to determine whether these patients perceived coercion differently than patients that were admitted voluntarily. This study included patients admitted to combined substance use disorder and psychiatry wards in three publicly funded treatment centres in Norway in the period 2009-2011. Participants included 63 patients that were admitted involuntarily, pursuant to the Norwegian Public Health Act, and 129 patients that were admitted voluntarily. All participants completed the Perceived Coercion Questionnaire. Sociodemographic variables were determined with the European Addiction Severity Index. The range of psychopathological symptoms was evaluated with the Symptom Checklist-90-R. Independent sample t-tests, the chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test were used to detect statistically significant differences between groups. Scores on the Perceived Coercion Questionnaire showed that patients admitted voluntarily and those admitted involuntarily experienced similar levels of perceived coercion. Those admitted voluntarily reported higher levels of perceived coercion from internal sources, and those admitted involuntarily perceived significantly higher coercion from legal sources. No differences between groups were found with the other tests. Our results suggested that assumptions about involuntary admissions should be evaluated carefully to determine how best to alleviate counterproductive feelings of coercion when a coerced admission is planned. Informing and collaborating with the patient will most likely facilitate a better experience during admission and treatment. Moreover, the patient is more likely to experience a better recovery process.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Researcher 2 6%
Librarian 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Psychology 3 10%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,466,682
of 8,748,067 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,080
of 3,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,749
of 299,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#61
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,748,067 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,756 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.