psychological medicine
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

772
(FIVE YEARS 29)

H-INDEX

20
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
pp. 025371762110464
Author(s):  
Vikas Menon ◽  
Karumarakandy Puthiyapurayil Jayaprakashan ◽  
Natarajan Varadharajan ◽  
Shahul Ameen ◽  
Samir Kumar Praharaj

Background: Little is known about the publication outcomes of submissions rejected by specialty psychiatry journals. We aimed to investigate the publication fate of original research manuscripts previously rejected by the Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine (IJPM). Methods: A random sampling of manuscripts was drawn from all submissions rejected between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019. Using the titles of these papers and the author names, a systematic search of electronic databases was carried out to examine if these manuscripts have been published elsewhere or not. We extracted data on a range of scientific and nonscientific parameters from the journal’s manuscript management portal for every rejected manuscript. Multivariable analysis was used to detect factors associated with eventual publication. Results: Out of 302 manuscripts analyzed, 139 (46.0%) were published elsewhere; of these, only 18 articles (13.0%) were published in a journal with higher standing than IJPM. Manuscripts of foreign origin (odds ratio [OR] 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06–2.97) and rejection following peer review or editorial re-review (OR 2.41, 95% CI = 1.22–4.74) were significantly associated with publication. Conclusion: Nearly half of the papers rejected by IJPM were eventually published in other journals, though such papers are more often published in journals with lower standing. Manuscripts rejected following peer review were more likely to reach full publication status compared to those which were desk rejected.


BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S80-S81
Author(s):  
Sarah Harvey ◽  
Joanna Bromley ◽  
Miles Edwards ◽  
Megan Hooper ◽  
Hannah McAndrew ◽  
...  

AimsAn audit to assess the impact of an Integrated Psychological Medicine Service (IPMS) on healthcare utilization pre & post intervention. We hypothesized that an IPMS approach would reduce healthcare utilization.BackgroundThe IPMS focusses on integrating biopsychosocial assessments into physical healthcare pathways. It has developed in stages as opportunities presented in different specialities leading to a heterogeneous non-standardised service. The key aim is involvement of mental health practitioners, psychologists & psychiatrists in complex patients with comorbidity or functional presentations in combination with the specialty MDT. This audit is the first attempt to gather data across all involved specialities and complete a randomised deep dive into cases.MethodReferrals into IMPS from July 2019 to June 2020 pulled 129 referrals, of which a 10% randomised sample of 13 patients was selected to analyse. 5 patients had one year of data either side of the duration of the IPMS intervention (excluding 8 patients with incomplete data sets).We analysed; the duration & nature of the IPMS intervention, the number, duration & speciality of inpatient admissions & short stays, outpatient attendances, non-attendances & patient cancellations. Psychosocial information was also gathered. One non-randomised patient was analysed as a comparative case illustration.ResultRandomised patients; patient 78's utilisation remained static, patient 71 post-referral engaged with health psychology & reduced healthcare utilisation. Patient 7 increased healthcare utilisation post-referral secondary to health complications. Patient 54 did not attend & increased healthcare utilisation post-referral. Patient 106 had increased healthcare utilisation post-referral from a new health condition. The randomised sample identified limitations of using healthcare utilisation as an outcome measure when contrasted to the non-randomised case (which significantly reduced healthcare utilisation post-referral).ConclusionCorrelation only can be inferred from the data due to sample size, limitations & confounding factors e.g. psycho-social life events, acquired illness. Alternative outcome measurements documented (e.g PHQ9/GAD7) were not reliably recorded across pathways.The results evidenced that single cases can demonstrate highly desirable effects of a biopsychosocial approach but they can also skew data sets if results are pooled due to the small sample size & heterogeneous interventions. With some patients an increase in healthcare utilisation was appropriate for an improved clinical outcome. This audit identified that utilising healthcare utilisation as an outcome measure is a crude tool with significant limitations & the need to agree tailored outcome measures based on the type of intervention to assess the impact of IPMS.


Author(s):  
Ajaegbu Obinna ◽  
Okike Clifford Onuorah ◽  
Muoneke Uzoamaka Vivian

Background: Child abuse occurs very frequently in Nigeria with approximately 6 out of every 10 children experiencing some form of violence. An estimate of 1 in every 4 girls and 1 in every 10 boys have undergone some form of sexual violence. Unfortunately this human violation often elicits little or no attention particularly where the abuser happens to be a close relative. Case: A 12 year old female adolescent was admitted into the children emergency room of a Nigerian tertiary institution with high grade fever and bilateral painful leg swelling following physical abuse by her biological father. This was buttressed with the findings made on examination. Parenteral anti-inflammatory and antibiotics were administered with surgical drainage of the lesions. The mental state of the Patient was evaluated by the Psychological Medicine Experts /Psychiatrist and also had counselling sessions during the course of treatment and shortly before discharge. Patient responded well to treatment and was discharged to the care of the women and children welfare unit of the State Ministry of Women Affairs. Conclusion: This case report underscores the need for continuous awareness creation on the inherent dangers of child abuse for both the general public and the Health practitioners.


2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 247-249
Author(s):  
B. Gavin ◽  
J. Lyne ◽  
F. McNicholas

AbstractCOVID-19 continues to exert unprecedented challenges for society and it is now well recognised that mental health is a key healthcare issue related to the pandemic. The current edition of the Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine focusses on the impact of COVID-19 on mental illness by combining historical review papers, current perspectives and original research. It is important that psychiatrists leading mental health services in Ireland continue to advocate for mental health supports for healthcare workers and their patients, while aiming to deliver services flexibly. As the pandemic evolves, it remains to be seen whether the necessary funding to deliver effective mental healthcare will be allocated to psychiatric services. Ongoing service evaluation and research is needed as the myriad impacts of the pandemic continue to evolve. In a time of severe budgetary constraints, ensuring optimum use of scare resources becomes an imperative.


2020 ◽  
pp. 025371762096584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikas Menon ◽  
Natarajan Varadharajan ◽  
Samir Kumar Praharaj ◽  
Shahul Ameen

Background: A proportion of manuscripts submitted to scientific journals get rejected, for varied reasons. A systematic analysis of the reasons for rejection will be relevant to editors, reviewers, and prospective authors. We aimed to analyze the reasons for rejection of manuscripts submitted to the Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, the flagship journal of Indian Psychiatric Society South Zonal Branch. Methods: We performed a content analysis of the rejection reports of all the articles submitted to the journal between January 1, 2018, and May 15, 2020. Rejection reports were extracted from the manuscript management website and divided into three types: desk rejections, post-peer-review rejections, and post-editorial-re-review rejections. They were analyzed separately for the rejection reasons, using a predefined coding frame. Results: A total of 898 rejection reports were available for content analysis. Rejection was a common fate for manuscripts across the types of submission; figures ranged from 26.7% for viewpoint articles to 72.1% for review articles. The median time to desk rejection was 3 days, while the median time to post-peer-review rejection and post-editorial-re-review rejection was 42 days and 96 days, respectively. The most common reasons for desk rejection were lack of novelty or being out of the journal’s scope. Inappropriate study designs, poor methodological descriptions, poor quality of writing, and weak study rationale were the most common rejection reasons mentioned by both peer reviewers and editorial re-reviewers. Conclusions: Common reasons for rejection included poor methodology and poorly written manuscripts. Prospective authors should pay adequate attention to conceptualization, design, and presentation of their study, apart from selecting an appropriate journal, to avoid rejection and enhance their manuscript’s chances of publication.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Dolores Malaspina

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Åsa Jansson

Abstract The introduction situates the narrative of this book—the reconceptualisation of melancholia in nineteenth-century psychiatry—firstly in the context of current attempts to ‘resurrect’ melancholia as a psychiatric diagnosis, secondly in relation to the history of melancholia more broadly, and finally in the context of past and present debates about classification in psychiatry. The core argument of the book is briefly outlined: in the nineteenth century, melancholia was reconfigured as a modern biomedical disorder of emotion. Two developments in particular were foundational to this new model of melancholia. The first was the uptake of physiological language and concepts into psychological medicine. The second was the institutionalisation of medical statistics together with a standardisation of asylum recording practices.


2020 ◽  
pp. 095269512092603
Author(s):  
Sarah Phelan

This article historicises a dream analytic intervention launched in the 1930s by Scottish psychiatrist and future professor of psychological medicine at the University of Glasgow (1948–73), Thomas Ferguson Rodger (1907–78). Intimate therapeutic meetings with five male patients are preserved within the so-called ‘dream books’, six manuscript notebooks from Rodger’s earlier career. Investigating one such case history in parallel with lecture material, this article elucidates the origins of Rodger’s adapted, rapport-centred psychotherapy, offered in his post-war National Health Service, Glasgow-based department. Oriented in a reading of the revealing fourth dream book, the article unearths a history of the reception and adaptation of psychoanalysis from within a therapeutic encounter and in a non-elite context. Situating Rodger’s psychiatric development in his Glasgow environment, it then contextualises the psychosocial narrative of the fourth book in relation to contrasting therapeutic commitments: an undiluted Freudianism and a pragmatic ‘commonsense’ psychotherapy, tempered to the clinical psychiatric, and often working-class, interwar Glasgow context. An exploration of pre-recorded dreams, transcribed free associations, and ‘weekly reports’ reveals that in practice, Rodger’s Meyerian attitude worked productively with Freudian techniques to ennoble the patient’s psychosocial testimony and personal wisdom. This psychotherapeutic eclecticism underpinned and made visible the patient’s concurrent faith in and resistance to psychoanalytic interpretation. Chronicling a collaborative route to psychotherapeutic knowledge within a discrete encounter, the article situates post-war treatment values in the interwar impasse of outpatient psychiatry.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document