International Journal of Law and Psychiatry最新文献

{"title":"An integrative review exploring decision-making processes in forensic psychopathology investigations","authors":"Barchielli Benedetta ,&nbsp;Cricenti Clarissa ,&nbsp;Giantesani Mario ,&nbsp;Parmigiani Giovanna ,&nbsp;Ferracuti Stefano ,&nbsp;Scarpazza Cristina","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102170","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102170","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Forensic psychopathology assessments play a critical role in legal decisions, particularly those related to criminal responsibility. However, despite their influence, the decision-making processes behind these assessments remain largely underexplored and inconsistently supported by empirical evidence. Emerging literature suggests that these decisions are shaped by multiple factors, including individual reasoning styles, team dynamics, and the influence of cognitive biases<strong>.</strong></div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To explore the factors that influence expert decision-making in forensic psychopathology evaluations, with a focus on cognitive bias, procedural complexity, and the use of structured tools.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>An integrative review guided by Cooper's framework was conducted. Eight studies meeting inclusion criteria were analyzed using narrative synthesis and thematic coding.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Three key themes were identified: (1) cognitive bias as a pervasive influence on expert judgment, (2) the iterative and context-dependent nature of forensic decision-making, and (3) inconsistencies between subjective clinical reasoning and structured assessment tools. While structured professional judgment tools and validated instruments showed potential for increasing accuracy and inter-rater reliability, their use remained uneven. Additionally, experienced clinicians often favored subjective judgment over formalized methods, which may limit transparency and reproducibility. The review highlights the need to reframe forensic evaluation as a reflective, evidence-informed process grounded in transparency and standardization. Integrating structured methods and debiasing strategies from other medical disciplines may enhance the validity and fairness of forensic judgments. These findings have implications for clinical training, interdisciplinary collaboration, and legal policy, and underscore the urgency of further research in this underdeveloped area of forensic mental health.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102170"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145617327","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":"Lack of challenge to substantive criteria at mental health tribunals: Amplifying the medical perspective?","authors":"Sam Boyle ,&nbsp;Fiona Jager ,&nbsp;Jean-Laurent Domingue ,&nbsp;Amélie Perron","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102166","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102166","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Mental health tribunals provide legal safeguards for compulsory treatment for mental illness. Despite one of these tribunals' purposes being to give people subject to compulsory treatment a “day in court”, research has shown that individuals' experience of mental health tribunals is highly negative. To understand these negative experiences, we conducted a multi-stakeholder study of the Consent and Capacity Board, a mental health tribunal in Ontario, Canada. Our research revealed that disputes in the hearings tended to focus on procedural requirements of the compulsory treatment orders, and although substantive legal criteria were addressed, the medical conclusions underlying those criteria were not directly challenged. Further, in cases where a client “wins” and the treatment order is revoked, our analysis shows the medical perspective remained authoritative. Finally, although people subject to treatment orders were given a chance to speak at hearings, in most cases theirs was the only voice challenging the psychiatrist's medical conclusions, and their contribution would usually only lessen the chance of the order being revoked. Therefore, we argue that rather than challenging medical decision-making, as may be expected, tribunal hearings unintentionally amplify the medical perspective in a manner that is likely to be upsetting for people subject to the treatment orders. We acknowledge that this effect is ingrained in the current system and will be challenging to ameliorate. Nonetheless, it is an important consideration for those in legal and clinical practice, and policy makers. We give some suggestions about how these experiences could be improved and for further research opportunities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102166"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145584496","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":"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}