MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408366115 · doi:10.1177/10547738251321067

When Psychiatric Services Become a Waiting Room: Situational Analysis of Involuntary Commitment and Treatment as Experienced by Patients and Nurses

2025· article· en· W4408366115 on OpenAlex
Pierre Pariseau‐Legault, David Pelosse, Emmanuelle Bernheim, Marie‐Hélène Goulet, Guillaume Ouellet, Lisandre Labrecque‐Lebeau, Jean Daniel Jacob, Dave Holmes

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nursing Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrounded theoryNursingDistressSituational ethicsPsychologyInvoluntary treatmentMedicineQualitative researchPsychiatryMental healthSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing body of literature highlights the involvement of nurses in the application of involuntary commitment and treatments in psychiatry. The violence underlying these coercive practices is often discussed, as they infringe on human rights and have negative effects on both patients and healthcare staff. The current state of knowledge on this subject, however, fails to inform us of what characterizes and influences these practices in psychiatric nursing. A situational analysis was conducted to gain a better understanding of this issue. This qualitative research aims to explore the characteristics of nursing care during involuntary commitment and treatments. In all, 10 nurses ( n = 10) and 11 patients ( n = 11) participated in semi-structured interviews and completed a sociodemographic questionnaire. Data analysis followed a grounded theory approach, involving a process of coding, conceptualizing, categorizing, constant comparison, and relational mapping, accompanied by analytical memos. Four conceptual categories emerged from data analysis: (1) Psychiatry as a waiting room, (2) nurses as subordinates, (3) nothing else but medication, and (4) resisting undignifying care. The results suggest that clinical issues surrounding involuntary commitment and treatments can be explained by how care is conceived. The psychiatric nursing practice seems to be limited to the application of coercive power, such as forced administration of medication. The distress potentially induced by involuntary commitment and treatments in patients comes to be ignored in favor of compliance with the legal procedures. The results describe a situation where patients felt abandoned to those procedures as if refusing to be hospitalized or treated were incompatible with any other form of care. Several participants also report having suffered negative consequences following one or more coerced psychiatric episodes. For them, refusal of care therefore seems to be associated with a resistance against the current violence of biomedical psychiatry, rather than a refusal to obtain help and support.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.447 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it