International Journal of Law and Psychiatry最新文献

{"title":"Conflictual encounters with individuals with mental illness from the perspective of police officers: Reasons, challenges, and experiences with escalating and De-escalating factors – An empirical study of German police officers","authors":"Lena Posch","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102167","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102167","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper examines the perspective of police officers on conflictual encounters with individuals with mental illness. The study aims to identify the frequency, challenges, reasons for intervention, conflict potential, and factors contributing to escalation and deescalation in operations involving mentally ill individuals. To achieve this, a survey of <em>N</em> = 157 police officers was conducted, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative elements. The results indicate that operations involving mentally disturbed individuals are common and a part of them lead to conflict situations. The primary reasons identified on the part of the individuals involved were a lack of understanding of the situation, aggression, mood instability, delusions, disorder-related factors, and resistance or a lack of manageability. On the part of the police officers, impatience, time constraints, and inappropriate intervention strategies were perceived as contributing factors to these conflictual situations. The factors identified as escalating or de-escalating conflict by the police officers were consistent with those reported by individuals with mental illness in previous studies. The report of using force more frequently in deployments with individuals with mental disorders compared to other deployments was positively correlated with insecurity about how to behave during such deployments, perceiving deployments with individuals with mental disorders as particularly dangerous, and negatively correlated with the feeling of being well-prepared for such deployments, highlighting the high relevance of profound police training. The findings are discussed in the context of training approaches for improving police handling of such situations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102167"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145617328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Can coercion in psychiatry be justified? A theoretical adversarial collaboration approach","authors":"Dirk Richter ,&nbsp;Tilman Steinert","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102171","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102171","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The use of coercion in psychiatry is one of the most controversial issues in modern healthcare. There are clinical, legal and ethical arguments in favour of both the abolition and justification of coercion in psychiatry. The two lines of argument are often diametrically opposed, so further development of the discussion seems difficult. To address this unsatisfactory situation, we have applied the approach of adversarial collaboration to this issue. The two authors represent fundamentally different points of view on the question of the legitimisation of coercion in psychiatry. Through a methodically guided exchange of arguments, numerous consensus hypotheses, dissent hypotheses and general consensus hypotheses with dissent in detail were developed. The main findings include the fact that the antagonists argue from completely different starting points at the core of the argument, namely, general arguments vs. individual clinical cases. In addition, antagonists hold consistent positions on many topics. It can therefore be concluded that both those in favour and those against the abolition of coercion in psychiatry are arguing with good intentions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102171"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145617326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the admission experience survey in individuals with mental illness","authors":"Mayui Nara ,&nbsp;Asami Matsunaga ,&nbsp;Yuuki Yamada ,&nbsp;Chiyo Fujii ,&nbsp;Maki Taniguchi","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102169","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102169","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Developing effective strategies to reduce perceived coercion during psychiatric hospitalization requires systematic monitoring of patients' experiences. The Admission Experience Survey (AES) evaluates patients' perceptions of the psychiatric hospitalization process. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the AES (AES-J) and assess its reliability and validity in individuals with mental illness. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of individuals with mental illnesses who had experienced psychiatric hospitalization in Japan. The AES-J was developed and evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and multi-group CFA. Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the validity against inpatient care experience, patient satisfaction, and mental distress. Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were computed to determine internal consistency and test–retest reliability. A total of 135 participants were enrolled, and 50 completed the AES-J twice. CFA supported the original three-factor structure (Perceived Coercion, Negative Pressures, and Process Exclusion). The strict invariance model demonstrated comparable goodness-of-fit indices to the scalar invariance model. Perceived Coercion and Process Exclusion were significantly correlated with inpatient care experience and patient satisfaction. Negative Pressures was correlated considerably with inpatient care experience but not patient satisfaction. Mental distress did not demonstrate significant correlations with any of the three subscales. Cronbach's alphas were 0.82–0.88, and ICCs were 0.77–0.89. This AES-J showed acceptable validity and reliability for assessing admission experiences among individuals with mental illness in Japan.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102169"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145584495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The importation model mediated: New evidence for security threat group in the prediction of prison misconduct","authors":"Matt DeLisi ,&nbsp;H. Daniel Butler ,&nbsp;Ben Stickle ,&nbsp;Brendan D. Dooley","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102163","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102163","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study explores the importation model's role in predicting prison misconduct, emphasizing the mediating effect of security threat group membership. Our analysis draws upon archival data from 636 individuals on death row in California. Structural equation modeling examined relationships between pre-prison characteristics—such as psychopathy, age at first arrest, and prior prisons sentences—and prison misconduct. Findings reveal that security threat group membership significantly mediates the impact of psychopathy and age at first arrest on misconduct, accounting for 60 % and 79 % of their respective effects. Moreover, security threat group membership is strongly associated with institutional misconduct, highlighting its role as a critical factor in prison disorder. The results suggest that pre-prison experiences and security threat group involvement should be integral to risk assessments and management strategies of correctional clients. These insights contribute to understanding prison dynamics and offer practical guidance for improving institutional security and reducing misconduct through targeted interventions addressing security threat group activities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102163"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145579283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Addressing insanity in paedophilic disorder: The need for a cognitive approach for forensic assessment to correctly identify idiopathic, acquired and iatrogenic forms","authors":"Alexa Schincariol ,&nbsp;Liisa Camilla Gatto ,&nbsp;Georgia Zara ,&nbsp;Pietro Pietrini ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Sartori ,&nbsp;Stefano Ferracuti ,&nbsp;Cristina Scarpazza","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102164","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102164","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Assessing insanity in individuals with paedophilic disorder presents unique challenges, particularly due to the diverse aetiologies of the condition, which lead to varying symptomatology and behavioural manifestations. To address this complexity, in this article we overview the characteristics of three variants of paedophilic disorder – idiopathic, acquired, and iatrogenic – and highlight the key obstacles in differentiating these forms, resulting in inconsistent and, at times, biased judicial outcomes. Through the analysis of three real-life case studies, we illustrate how forensic evaluations must go beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, integrating neuropsychological and neuroimaging assessment to provide more precise determinations of criminal responsibility. We therefore propose a cognitive model for the forensic assessment of insanity that emphasises the role of scientific evidence in distinguishing cases in which neurological conditions or medical treatments significantly impair volitional and cognitive capacities. In such cases, incarceration may be inappropriate, as incarceration hinders rehabilitation, while treatment in specialised non-custodial facilities could better address the underlying condition and reduce the risk of recidivism. In our analysis, we argue for the inclusion of a criterion in the DSM to ensure that the symptoms of paedophilic disorders are not due to substance effects or other medical conditions. Finally, we propose guidelines for forensic assessments of insanity in child sexual offences that support a multidisciplinary approach based on the cognitive model. In this framework, behavioural analysis, neuropsychological assessment, and (if necessary) neuroimaging techniques are combined to assess how the condition affects self-determination, ultimately leading to more accurate and scientifically informed legal decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102164"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145579284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cross-views between the roles of the therapist and the expert in forensic psychology/psychiatry: A qualitative study","authors":"Maurice W.D. Stauffacher ,&nbsp;Silke Grabherr ,&nbsp;Stefan Kaiser ,&nbsp;Yvan Jeanneret ,&nbsp;Valérie Moulin","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102162","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102162","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aims of the study</h3><div>Forensic psychology/psychiatry seems particularly subject to ethical tensions, as it involves not only the expert-evaluee or therapist-patient relationships, but also the judicial authorities. This exploratory study aims to identify the professional roles—namely the identity and posture—of both the expert and the therapist within the medico-legal field, with a view to uncovering potential ethical tensions that may arise in the transition from one role to the other.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>This exploratory qualitative study was conducted through two research focus groups: one composed of forensic psychiatry experts, and the other of clinical therapists in a Swiss university hospital. We performed a narrative and thematic analysis based on the verbatim transcripts to compare the two groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In therapists' discourse, patient support and guidance were central concerns. In the expert witnesses' discourse, the investigation was central. Regarding the ethical posture, therapists emphasised the importance of adjusting to their patients' situations, and the experts mainly cited the bioethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, equity and autonomy. The transition from the role of therapist to expert involves the relinquishment of the supportive and guiding function in favour of an investigative posture serving judicial authority, within a limited time frame.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study suggests that tensions may emerge when transitioning between the roles of therapists and experts, particularly concerning issues such as confidentiality, beneficence, and the principles of objectivity and neutrality. Moreover, all participants in both focus groups suggested that prior therapeutic experience was an asset for experts, particularly if they were able to relinquish any therapeutic function.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145525601","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Observations and perspectives of peer professionals involved in civil commitment rulings for individuals with mental illnesses in South Korea","authors":"Hyunsung Oh ,&nbsp;Sohyun Woo ,&nbsp;Soyoun Shin ,&nbsp;Lynn C. Holley ,&nbsp;Michael Shafer ,&nbsp;Heeseung Choi","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102161","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102161","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Following the 2016 South Korean statutory revision that governs psychiatric civil commitment, five regional Admission Suitability Review Boards (ASRBs) were established in 2017. These mental health tribunals were designed to provide public oversight of involuntary hospitalization of people diagnosed with mental illnesses. Most ASRBs are composed of psychiatrists or non-peer mental health professionals. Handful of ASRBs also invited peer professionals—individuals with lived experience of mental illness in recovery—to their civil commitment rulings for deliberation. This study describes observations and perspectives of those peer professionals who served on ASRBs, including their recommendations for improving the processes and outcomes of ASRB hearings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Nine peer professionals who have served on ASRBs since 2017 participated in semi-structured individual interviews. Seven were currently practicing peer support services outside the ASRB. Virtual interviews, conducted from October 2023 to November 2023 ranged from 31 to 98 min (M = 72 min). We identified themes and codes through reiterative thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Four themes emerged from participant narratives. Peer professionals reported mental illness prejudice and discrimination during ASRB hearings, described structural hurdles and barriers embedded in the statute that authorized ASRBs, offered areas for improving ASRB processes, and described mutual growth of peer professionals and their non-peer board member colleagues that can occur when peer professionals participate in ASRB hearings.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Peer professionals play critical roles in ASRBs, which are mandated to ensure fairness for individuals petitioned for civil commitment. By Bridging the gap between petitioned individuals and non-peer colleagues, peer professionals enrich the deliberation process with knowledge and perspectives gained from their own lived experiences. Efforts to enhance procedural justice of ASRBs include clarifying and strengthening ASRB policies and procedures, as well as providing training and technical assistance. These effort should ensure that the voices of petitioned individuals and other stakeholders are heard through ASRB deliberation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102161"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145472183","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Abolition: Is this the only pathway to upholding human rights and ensuring epistemic justice in psychiatry? A key informant qualitative study","authors":"Cath Roper ,&nbsp;Nina Joffee-Kohn ,&nbsp;Vrinda Edan ,&nbsp;Natasha Swingler ,&nbsp;Piers Gooding ,&nbsp;Bridget Hamilton","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102160","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102160","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Mental health legislation authorises involuntary psychiatric intervention in certain circumstances. Although human rights concerns are becoming more prominent, debates among legal experts, clinicians and activists continue to swirl around people's rights to equal recognition before the law, such as described in the (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities, 2006).</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This qualitative descriptive study aimed to better understand diverse views of people known to hold a critique of coercion in mental health services, on the practical expression of upholding human rights in the context of mental health laws.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 key informants from five different countries and data was analysed using an inductive, thematic approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, informants characterised mental health laws as discriminatory, harmful and unjustifiable. Three themes and six sub-themes were identified. This study reports on the major themes which include: an ethical position (focusing on the present harms associated with mental health laws), strategies, (an expression of the opportunity to bring about change) and a visionary position. We explore these three features in the views of key informants as important positions in the field of abolition, and analyse each for the ‘hermeneutic resources’ – forms of collective interpretive resources - they provide.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Abolition of mental health laws is often seen as not feasible in the context of psychiatry. However, abolition theories and practices are hermeneutic resources that need to be better understood because they offer social justice and community-led solutions beyond mental health laws and systems.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102160"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145424866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Replacing the medical member of the first-tier Tribunal (Mental health) with a clinical member for tribunal applications and references made under the Mental Health Act 1983 (England and Wales)","authors":"Carole Burrell,&nbsp;John L. Taylor","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102159","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102159","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health) was established in 2008 to deal with applications and references concerning people subject to the powers of the England and Wales Mental Health Act 1983. Substantive decisions in tribunal proceedings are made by a panel consisting of a legally qualified judge, a specialist member and a medical member. Applicants to the post of medical member must meet statutory and nonstatutory eligibility requirements including holding a consultant psychiatrist post for at least three years. In this paper, comparisons with other common law jurisdictions are drawn and it is argued that the medical member role in this tribunal is outdated and should be replaced by a newly established ‘clinical member’ role. Eligibility should be based on competence and skills rather than professional qualifications. The post would be open to consultant level mental health practitioners from multiprofessional backgrounds who demonstrate they are capable of meeting the specialist needs of the tribunal. Broadening the range of professionals eligible to be appointed to the clinical member post will help alleviate longstanding difficulties in medical member recruitment; will assist with tribunal efficiency; is in keeping with the extended roles introduced by the Mental Health Act 2007; and will encourage diversity in the range of persons available for selection for appointment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102159"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145349330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Factors influencing decision-making capacity assessments in involuntary care and treatment in Norway: A qualitative exploration of multi-stakeholder perspectives","authors":"Jacob Jorem ,&nbsp;Reidun Førde ,&nbsp;Tonje Lossius Husum ,&nbsp;Jørgen Dahlberg ,&nbsp;Reidar Pedersen","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102157","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102157","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Decision-making capacity (DMC) is a widely used criterion in health laws to balance respect for patient autonomy with protection from the potential consequences of treatment decisions. In 2017, lacking DMC was introduced as an additional criterion for involuntary care and treatment following comprehensive amendments to the Norwegian Mental Health Care Act. Despite the amendments aiming to reduce involuntary care and treatment rates, national health registry data indicate continued rising rates along the pre-2017 trajectory after an initial reduction in 2017. While previous studies suggesting varying DMC assessment quality, little is known about the potential factors influencing these variations.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>To identify factors influencing DMC assessments after introducing a capacity-based mental health law governing involuntary care and treatment.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>60 purposively sampled stakeholders, including patients, families, health professionals, and lawyers, participated in semi-structured interviews and focus groups in 2018, with 26 of these participating in follow-up interviews in 2022–23. The transcribed interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Data analysis generated four themes: 1) available resources' influence on DMC assessments; 2) health professionals' values and practices regarding involuntary care; 3) legal interpretations by supervisory bodies regarding involuntary care; and 4) political signals from the health authorities regarding involuntary care.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>DMC assessments appear to be influenced by several factors, including resource availability, health professionals' values and practices, legal interpretations by supervisory bodies, and political signals from health authorities. Combined with a lack of systematic training and validated tools, these factors may have raised the threshold for accessing mental healthcare beyond what systematic DMC assessments would suggest, contributing to increased illness severity among patients and rising involuntary care rates post-2017. Further research is needed to better understand the complex dynamics involved in DMC assessments and how to effectively implement capacity-based health laws.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102157"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145267636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}