Skip to main content
MMedVellum
MCQsExamsAtlas
DashboardPricing
MMedVellum

The exam atlas that feels like a flagship product — evidence-graded topics and exam tools for MBBS and fellowship preparation. Built to scale to fifty specialties. Educational content only — not medical advice.

llms.txt·psychiatry LLM catalog · sitemap

Atlas

  • Specialty atlas
  • MBBS / Core medicine
  • Dermatology
  • ICU Fellowship (CICM)
  • Anaesthesia
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Psychiatry Fellowship

Study & account

  • MCQ practice
  • Practice alias
  • Exam tools
  • Dashboard
  • Pricing
  • Sign in

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

Clinical Atlas Prestige · Evidence-first

Psych CASC / OSCEEmergency psychiatry — violence risk

Psych CASC / OSCE · Emergency psychiatry — violence risk

Assess violence risk and explain the plan — CASC communication station

MRCPsych/FRANZCP-style CASC: gather collateral on violence risk, balance confidentiality with safety, explain dynamic factors and next steps, avoid stigmatising language, involve family appropriately.

communication
On this page & tools

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNB

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNB
Prompt
A family member is distressed after their adult son with psychosis threatened a neighbour; you must assess risk information, communicate non-stigmatisingly, and outline a safety plan without breaking confidentiality unlawfully.

Station brief

Format. Communication station, approximately 7–10 minutes active time after reading. You are the psychiatry registrar in ED. The examiner plays a parent of a 28-year-old man with recent-onset psychosis. [1]

Candidate instructions. Take a focused collateral history about threats and violence risk. Explain in plain language how you assess risk without stigmatising all people with mental illness. Outline immediate safety steps and what happens next. Discuss confidentiality limits when others may be at risk. Check understanding. Do not invent specific Mental Health Act section numbers. [1][2]

Candidate scenario

Your patient’s parent says: "He told the neighbour he’d make them pay for ruining his life. He’s barely slept, talking about cameras in the walls. He drinks heavily some nights. We have his father’s old shotgun locked in a shed at the farm. I’m scared but I don’t want him branded as a monster." The patient is in a side room with security nearby and has not yet been fully assessed by you. [3]

Marking domains

  • Empathy and non-stigmatising language
  • Structured enquiry: threats, intent, target, means (shotgun), substances, sleep, prior violence
  • Explains dynamic vs background factors simply
  • Immediate safety: weapon, neighbour, observation, assessment plan
  • Confidentiality vs duty to protect (principles; jurisdiction-specific detail not invented)
  • Clear next steps and safety-net; checks understanding
  • Avoids equating psychosis with permanent dangerousness [1][2]
Reveal assessor key

Open. Thank parent for coming; acknowledge fear; name time and purpose; validate that most people with psychosis are not violent while taking this threat seriously. [2]

Collateral. Exact words of threat; timing; access to neighbour; any weapons (shotgun location/keys); alcohol pattern; prior assaults; sleep; medication adherence; what helps calm him. [3]

Explain assessment. We look at history, current symptoms, substances, and access to means and victims — not a label that defines him forever. Prior violence and intoxication raise concern; treatment of psychosis and securing the firearm reduce risk. [1][3]

Plan. Full psychiatric assessment; safe environment; remove/secure shotgun via lawful pathway; consider whether neighbour needs warning/police involvement under local rules; likely need for intensive treatment or admission; substance advice; review and contact points. [1]

Confidentiality. You will share information needed to keep people safe; you will not gossip; patient dignity preserved. Invite questions; summarise. [1]

References

  1. [1]Buchanan A Risk of violence by psychiatric patients: beyond the "actuarial versus clinical" assessment debate Psychiatr Serv, 2008.PMID 18245161
  2. [2]Fazel S, Gulati G, Linsell L, et al. Schizophrenia and violence: systematic review and meta-analysis PLoS Med, 2009.PMID 19668362
  3. [3]Witt K, van Dorn R, Fazel S Risk factors for violence in psychosis: systematic review and meta-regression analysis of 110 studies PLoS One, 2013.PMID 23418482