Expert arguments for trends of psychiatric bed numbers: A systematic review of qualitative data (vol 12, 745247, 2021)

Mundt A.P.; Langerfeldt S.D.; Serri E.R.; Siebenförcher, M; Priebe S.

Keywords: inpatient, institutionalization, consensus, length of stay, Expert recommendation, psychiatric hospital beds, general hospital psychiatry

Abstract

In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 2 as published. Column headings are labeled as “High- and upper-middle income countries (HIC)“ and ”Lower-Middle and Low-Income countries (LMIC)“. The heading should read ”High-Income Countries (HIC)“ and ”Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC)," respectively. Zeros were erroneously inserted in several lines that should have been blank, On page 12 1.1. Cost effectiveness 1.2 Inappropriate use of inpatient care 1.4. Quality of care is maintained or improved with less beds 1.5. Less psychiatric bed needs On page 13 Expert arguments to increase or maintain psychiatric bed numbers 2.1 Lack of beds for financial pressure 2.3 High demand of psychiatric beds 2.4 Inadequately short length of stay.

Más información

Título según WOS: Expert arguments for trends of psychiatric bed numbers: A systematic review of qualitative data (vol 12, 745247, 2021)
Título según SCOPUS: Corrigendum: Expert arguments for trends of psychiatric bed numbers: A systematic review of qualitative data, (Front. Psychiatry, (2022), 12, (745247), 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.745247
Título de la Revista: Frontiers in Psychiatry
Volumen: 13
Editorial: FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
Fecha de publicación: 2022
Idioma: English
DOI:

10.3389/fpsyt.2022.957272

Notas: ISI, SCOPUS