Transatlantic variation in the attributed etiology of psychosis.

G Eric Jarvis, Venkat Bhat, Tomas Jurcik, Vincenzo Spigonardo, Rob Whitley
{"title":"Transatlantic variation in the attributed etiology of psychosis.","authors":"G Eric Jarvis,&nbsp;Venkat Bhat,&nbsp;Tomas Jurcik,&nbsp;Vincenzo Spigonardo,&nbsp;Rob Whitley","doi":"10.1177/0020764014565798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Differences in transatlantic perception of psychosis have been reported in the historical psychiatric literature.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aims to determine if articles in the American Journal of Psychiatry (AJP) are more likely to attribute biological factors to the etiology of psychosis than those of the British Journal of Psychiatry (BJP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic MEDLINE search for articles in the AJP and BJP from 2005 to 2007 identified 360 abstracts with psychosis and etiology-related words. Chi-square analyses were used to test differences in the proportion of attributed biological or psychosocial etiology of psychosis in each journal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A greater proportion of abstracts (83/87) in the AJP attributed biological etiology of psychosis (χ(2) = 12.33, df = 1, p < 0.001), while a greater proportion in the BJP (16/44 abstracts) attributed psychosocial etiology (χ(2) = 19.76, df = 1, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The AJP tends to publish biomedical explanations of psychosis, while the BJP shows a relative preference for psychosocial theories.</p>","PeriodicalId":257862,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of social psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"577-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0020764014565798","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of social psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764014565798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/12/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: Differences in transatlantic perception of psychosis have been reported in the historical psychiatric literature.

Aims: This study aims to determine if articles in the American Journal of Psychiatry (AJP) are more likely to attribute biological factors to the etiology of psychosis than those of the British Journal of Psychiatry (BJP).

Methods: A systematic MEDLINE search for articles in the AJP and BJP from 2005 to 2007 identified 360 abstracts with psychosis and etiology-related words. Chi-square analyses were used to test differences in the proportion of attributed biological or psychosocial etiology of psychosis in each journal.

Results: A greater proportion of abstracts (83/87) in the AJP attributed biological etiology of psychosis (χ(2) = 12.33, df = 1, p < 0.001), while a greater proportion in the BJP (16/44 abstracts) attributed psychosocial etiology (χ(2) = 19.76, df = 1, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The AJP tends to publish biomedical explanations of psychosis, while the BJP shows a relative preference for psychosocial theories.

精神病归因病因的大西洋差异。
背景:在历史上的精神病学文献中已经报道了大西洋两岸对精神病认知的差异。目的:本研究旨在确定美国精神病学杂志(AJP)上的文章是否比英国精神病学杂志(BJP)上的文章更有可能将生物学因素归因于精神病的病因。方法:通过MEDLINE系统检索2005年至2007年《美国精神病学杂志》和《印度人民党》的文章,确定了360篇带有精神病和病因学相关词汇的摘要。卡方分析用于检验各期刊中精神病的归因生物学或社会心理病因比例的差异。结果:AJP中有较大比例的摘要(83/87)归因于精神病的生物学病因(χ(2) = 12.33, df = 1, p)。结论:AJP倾向于发表精神病的生物医学解释,而印度人民党则相对倾向于社会心理理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信