Search

In research, outcomes are often categorized as primary and secondary. The primary outcome is the most important one; it determines whether the study is considered 'successful' or not. Secondary outcomes are chosen because they provide supporting evidence for the results of the primary outcome or additional information about the subject being studied. For reasons that are explained in this paper, secondary outcomes should be cautiously interpreted. There are varying practices regarding publishing secondary outcomes. Some authors publish these separately, while others include them in the main publication. In some contexts, the former can lead to concerns about the quality and relevance of the data being published. In this article, we discuss primary and secondary outcomes, the importance and interpretation of secondary outcomes, and considerations for publishing multiple outcomes in separate papers. We also discuss the special case of secondary analyses and post hoc analyses and provide guidance on good publishing practices. Throughout the article, we use relevant examples to make these concepts easier to understand. While the article is primarily aimed at early career researchers, it offers insights that may be helpful to researchers, reviewers, and editors across all levels of expertise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This paper highlights the difficulties and lacunae in the Mental Health Care Act 2017 that hinder its implementation and use for the care and treatment of persons with mental illness in India. Methods: An online nationwide survey, involving structured questions as well as open-ended questions, to elicit the level of implementation, experience in complying with the provisions of the Act, and level of satisfaction, of practicing psychiatrists was carried out. Responses were analyzed using appropriate statistics. Results: 600 respondents answered the online questionnaire. A majority of psychiatrists were senior practitioners with over 10 years of experience. 92.5% respondents were dissatisfied with the MHCA, wherein 73.3% wanted it amended, and 19.2% asked for repeal. Procedural issues were deterrent for 66.5% from taking medically necessary or helpful decisions for patients. Non-implementation of the Act was a major finding. Major dissatisfaction was expressed regarding judicial over reach in admission and discharge procedures, inclusion of general hospital psychiatry units in the definition of mental health establishment, non-applicability of provisions like advance directive and nominated representative in Indian setting, and that all treatment should be covered under insurance. Conclusion: The Act in its present form defies the spirit of its own objectives and is unimplementable. It needs major revisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Every year the scientific sessions of Annual National Conference of Indian Psychiatric Society (ANCIPS) are marked by presentation of free papers, posters, and award paper sessions, which are usually meant for presentation of new research which is not yet published. Hence, it is expected that these papers will be published in near future so that the scientific literature is distributed and shared with wider audience. Aim: This paper aims to evaluate the abstract to publication rate of papers presented during ANCIPS in the years 2012–2014. Materials and Methods: For this study, all the free papers, posters, and award papers presented during the ANCIPS of 2012–2014 were listed, and electronic searches were carried out to search for published articles. In addition, one of the authors of papers not found in the electronic searches were contacted through E-mail. Results: A total of 1081 papers were presented during the ANCIPS in the 3 year period under study. Of these, 64 were award papers, 622 were free papers, and 395 were posters. Majority (n = 807; 74.6%) of these could be categorized as research data-based presentations; this was followed by case reports/series (203; 18.8%), review of literature (n = 35; 3.3%), and others (n = 36; 3.3%). Overall, only 27% of the papers were published after at least 5 years of the presentation. Of all the award papers, 69.6% of papers were published, whereas only 26.8% of free oral papers and 22.5% of free posters were published. About half (45.6%) of the papers were published in national journals. In terms of indexing, among those which were published, 62.8% were published in Medline-indexed (PubMed-listed) Journals with a mean impact factor of 1. Conclusion: The present study shows that only 27% of the abstracts presented during the ANCIPS are ultimately published as full text articles in the next 5 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article informs the alcohol addiction impacts not only the individual abusing it but also the people living with them. It mentions the extensive research has been conducted on various aspects of alcoholism, the lives of caretakers, especially wives of alcoholic men in the Indian context, have been given secondary consideration by society and researchers. It highlight the limited studies on this topic in the Indian setting.

A correction is presented to the article "Amend the Mental Health Care Act 2017: A Survey of Indian Psychiatrists (Paper 1)", which appeared in the last issue of the periodical.

The article presents several studies related to psychiatry that were presented in free papers Topics include pharmacovigilance in psychiatric outpatient department in a tertiary care hospital; clinical outcomes in patients with drug resistant schizophrenia receiving antipsychotics other than clozapine; and Impact of two weeks psychiatric clinical posting on Intern doctors' knowledge and attitudes towards psychiatry and mental illnesses.

Background: Despite peer review, publications in scientific journals are not always well written, sometimes contain errors, and often exhibit deliberate or unintended biases. It is necessary to learn how to identify such limitations. It is also necessary to learn how to read between and beyond the lines of papers no matter how well written they are and no matter how highly ranked the journal is. Materials and Methods: This paper critically examines an important article in a leading journal with a view to help the reader learn how to place the findings of a study in perspective, understand its limitations, and glean information beyond that actually presented and discussed in the text. Results: Several issues are examined; these relate to case-control research designs, confounding, propensity matching, absolute risk, confidence intervals, interpretation of findings, real-world relevance, ecological validity, and definition of a cause-effect relationship. Conclusions: The issues examined in this paper reflect common themes in research, and a reader aware of these themes will more easily identify them in his future readings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstracts of scientific papers are sometimes poorly written, often lack important information, and occasionally convey a biased picture. This paper provides detailed suggestions, with examples, for writing the background, methods, results, and conclusions sections of a good abstract. The primary target of this paper is the young researcher; however, authors with all levels of experience may find useful ideas in the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mass media including television, internet, and newspapers influences public views about various issues by means of how it covers an issue. Newspapers have a wider reach and may affect the impact that a news story has on the reader by factors such as placement of the story within the different pages. We did a pilot study to see how two English newspapers from Mumbai, India were covering psychiatry related news stories. The study was done over a period of 3 months. We found a total of 870 psychiatry related news stories in the two newspapers over 3 months with the majority of them being covered in the main body of the newspapers. Sex‑related crime stories and/or sexual dysfunction stories received the highest coverage among all the news while treatment and/or recovery related stories received very little coverage. It is crucial that the print media takes more efforts in improving reporting of psychiatry‑related stories and help in de‑stigmatizing psychiatry as a discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5 (DSM-5) has been an exhaustive and elaborate exercise involving the review of DSM-IV categories, identifying new evidence and ideas, field testing, and revising issues in order that it is based on the best available evidence. This report of the Task Force of the Indian Psychiatric Society examines the current draft of the DSM-5 and discusses the implications from an Indian perspective. It highlights the issues related to the use of universal categories applied across diverse cultures. It reiterates the evidence for mental disorders commonly seen in India. It emphasizes the need for caution when clinical categories useful to specialists are employed in the contexts of primary care and in community settings. While the DSM-5 is essentially for the membership of the American Psychiatric Association, its impact will be felt far beyond the boundaries of psychiatry and that of the United States of America. However, its atheoretical approach, despite its pretensions, pushes a purely biomedical agenda to the exclusion of other approaches to mental health and illness. Nevertheless, the DSM-5 should serve a gate-keeping function, which intends to set minimum standards. It is work in progress and will continue to evolve with the generation of new evidence. For the DSM-5 to be relevant and useful across the cultures and countries, it needs to be broad-based and consider social and cultural contexts, issues, and phenomena. The convergence and compatibility with International Classification of Diseases-11 is a worthy goal. While the phenomenal effort of the DSM-5 revision is commendable, psychiatry should continue to strive for a more holistic understanding of mental health, illness, and disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents studies on medical topics. They include the one year follow-up study on the development of metabolic syndrome in diagnosed patients on a typical antipsychotics, the study of metabolic syndrome and obesity in drug naïve patients having recurrent major depressive disorder and bipolar depression, and the lifestyle and associated health issues in psychiatric outpatients in three diagnostic categories including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and anxiety or depression.

Nationa Medical Commission (NMC) had recently undertook the revision of Undergraduate CBME curriculum. the Authors were involved in Psychiatry curriculum revision. In this paper,authors explain the process of revision, the rationale behind the changes made and make specific suggestions for the better implementation of the revised curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information about the experience of practicing psychiatrists with the use of the Mental Health Care Act (MHCA), 2017, India, after 5 years of its promulgation has not been available. Aim: The present study was carried out to understand the experience of the practicing psychiatrists in using and complying with the MHCA 2017 and to bring out the problems and suggested reforms, if any, in various provisions of the MHCA 2017. Methods: An online survey by practicing psychiatrists of Indian Psychiatric Society on the various sections and provisions of the MHCA 17 was carried out through structured and open-ended responses. This paper presents the qualitative analysis of the open-ended responses. Results: There were 600 respondents, who gave a total of 1239 (range 116--154) responses to eight open-ended questions about various provisions of the MHCA. Qualitative analysis revealed that most respondents opined for keeping the General Hospital Psychiatry units exempted from inclusion as the mental health establishment, thus treating physical illness at par with the mental illness; a separate stand-alone law for mental illness perpetuates stigma, asked for a larger representation of psychiatrists in the State Mental Health Authority and Mental Health Review Boards. Most respondents opined that the provisions of capacity assessment, nominated representative, and advance directive are a hinderance in treatment and should be amended; treating psychiatrists and family/caregiver's consent should suffice for supported admission, just like in other disciplines of medicine; and MHCA 2017 needs major amendments/repeal to make it convenient for patient care. Any unauthorized places/centers where persons with mental illness are kept should come under regulatory control of the state mental health authorities. Conclusion The survey has highlighted several deficiencies and operational difficulties in the current Act that hinder the delivery of mental health care to patients with mental illness in the country and need amendments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: No analysis of redundant or duplicate publications, deemed unethical and unscientific, has been undertaken in psychiatric literature. Aim: To analyze the proportion and patterns of redundant publications associated with index articles published in two major Indian psychiatry journals. Methods: Index articles were original papers published in the Indian Journal of Psychiatry and the Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine between 2015 and 2017. Using a systematic search strategy that combined author names and article keywords, we combed the literature to identify and characterize redundant publications related to these index articles. Redundant publications were classified into one of the following categories using a priori definitions: dual, suspected dual, salami slicing, meat extender, and extended sample publication. Results: From 324 index articles screened, a total of 27 articles (8.4%) were identified to have 32 associated redundant publications of the following types: dual (n = 3), suspected dual (n = 2), salami slicing (n = 22), meat extender (n = 3), and extended sample publication (n = 2). A majority of the redundant articles (n = 23, 71.9%) failed to clearly cross-reference the prior publication(s). We also identified nine non-redundant but related publications with no proper cross-referencing in five of them. Conclusion: Redundant publications are a common practice in the psychiatry journals screened. Salami slicing is the most common form of redundancy, with no proper cross-referencing in most cases. Concerted efforts are needed to detect and deal with this concerning practice that undermines both science and ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]