↓ Skip to main content

The impact of structured decision making on absconding by forensic psychiatric patients: results from an A-B design study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
The impact of structured decision making on absconding by forensic psychiatric patients: results from an A-B design study
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0474-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander I F Simpson, Stephanie R Penney, Stephanie Fernane, Treena Wilkie

Abstract

Few studies have investigated absconding from forensic hospitals and there are no published studies of interventions aimed at reducing these incidents in forensic settings. We present a study of the impact of a new policy using structured professional judgment and an interdisciplinary team-based approach to granting privileges to forensic patients. We assess the impact of this policy on the rate and type of absconding from a metropolitan forensic facility. Following concern about the rate of absconding at our hospital, a new policy was implemented to guide the process of granting hospital grounds and community access privileges. Employing an A-B design, we investigated the rate, characteristics, and motivations of absconding events in the 18 months prior to, and 18 months following, implementation of this policy to assess its effectiveness. Eighty-six patients were responsible for 188 incidents of absconding during the 42-month study window. The rate of absconding decreased progressively from 17.8% of all patients at risk prior to implementation of the new policy, to 13.8% during implementation, and further to 12.0% following implementation. There was a differential impact of the policy on absconding events, in that the greatest reduction was witnessed in absconsions occurring from unaccompanied passes; this was offset, to some extent, by an increase in absconding occurring from within hospital units or from staff accompanied outings. Seven of the absconding events included incidents of minor violence, and two included the commission of other illegal behaviors. The most common reported motive for absconding across the time periods studied was a sense of boredom or frustration. Discharge rate from hospital was 22.9% prior to the implementation of the policy to 22.7% after its introduction, indicating no change in the rate of patients' eventual community reintegration. A structured and team-based approach to decision making regarding hospital grounds and community access privileges appeared to reduce the overall rate of absconding without slowing community reintegration of forensic patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Other 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 7 9%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 21 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 14%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 17 January 2020.
All research outputs
#3,784,072
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,397
of 4,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,871
of 264,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#12
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,684 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 264,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.