Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T23:56:22.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Agency and shared decision-making in psychosis: A discourse analytic study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2026

K. N. S. Schriver*
Affiliation:
Nordic languages and literature
N. Buus
Affiliation:
Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.
Introduction

Clinicians have often been criticised for excluding psychotic patients from decisions about their own treatment. While shared decision-making (SDM) is widely promoted, its use in psychiatry is still under-researched and sometimes contested. Some studies suggest SDM hasn’t delivered the expected benefits in general healthcare and may even leave patients feeling abandoned. This makes it important to look more closely at which kinds of SDM actually help patients feel more in control and empowered—especially in an inpatient, psychosis setting, where agency can be harder to support.

Objectives

This study explores how clinicians can foster agency in psychotic patients during treatment planning. We focus on inpatient consultations where patients actively express a desire to be involved in treatment decisions.

Methods

The study draws on four months of ethnographic fieldwork by the first author (KS) in a Danish mental health ward. During this time, she observed and/or recorded 58 doctor-patient conversations. For this analysis, we zoom in on consultations where patients showed a wish to participate in treatment decisions, using discourse analysis to unpack how these moments unfolded.

Results

In the inpatient setting, patients mainly tried to be involved in decisions about hospitalisation status—sometimes indirectly—while clinicians tended to focus on decisions about medication. Clinician responses to patient agency fell into three broad patterns:

  1. 1. Ignoring the patient’s expressed or insinuated wish for treatment.

  2. 2. Acknowledging the wish but discouraging agency by asking the patient to put trust in the clinicians or medicine.

  3. 3. Fostering agency by identifying patient resources and encouraging patients to reflect on them.

Conclusions

Clinicians can better support patient agency by 1) recognising patients’ treatment preferences and 2) actively identifying and discussing their coping strategies and goals. As psychiatric hospitals face challenges with frequent readmissions, helping patients mobilise their own resources may be one way to improve long-term outcomes.

Disclosure of Interest

None Declared

Information

Type
Abstract
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.