Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Oct 28:4-5:52-91.
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2018.10.004. eCollection 2018 Oct-Nov.

What Works in Youth Suicide Prevention? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations

What Works in Youth Suicide Prevention? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Jo Robinson et al. EClinicalMedicine. .

Abstract

Background: Young people require specific attention when it comes to suicide prevention, however efforts need to be based on robust evidence.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies examining the impact of interventions that were specifically designed to reduce suicide-related behavior in young people.

Findings: Ninety-nine studies were identified, of which 52 were conducted in clinical settings, 31 in educational or workplace settings, and 15 in community settings. Around half were randomized controlled trials. Large scale interventions delivered in both clinical and educational settings appear to reduce self-harm and suicidal ideation post-intervention, and to a lesser extent at follow-up. In community settings, multi-faceted, place-based approaches seem to have an impact. Study quality was limited.

Interpretation: Overall whilst the number and range of studies is encouraging, gaps exist. Few studies were conducted in low-middle income countries or with demographic populations known to be at increased risk. Similarly, there was a lack of studies conducted in primary care, universities and workplaces. However, we identified that specific youth suicide-prevention interventions can reduce self-harm and suicidal ideation; these types of intervention need testing in high-quality studies.

Keywords: Meta-analysis; Self-harm; Suicide prevention; Systematic review; Young people.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Random effects risk ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) for clinical interventions at the post-intervention assessment.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Random effects risk ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) for clinical interventions at the longest follow-up assessment.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Random effects risk ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) for educational interventions at the post-intervention assessment.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Random effects risk ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) for educational interventions at the longest follow-up assessment.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World Health Organization . World Health Organization; Switzerland: 2014. Preventing suicide: a global imperative.
    1. Hawton K., Zahl D., Weatherall R. Suicide following deliberate self-harm: long-term follow-up of patients who presented to a general hospital. Br J Psychiatry. 2003;182(6):537–542. - PubMed
    1. Geulayov G., Kapur N., Turnbull P. Epidemiology and trends in non-fatal self-harm in three centres in England, 2000–2012: findings from the Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England. BMJ Open. 2016:6(4). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nock M., Green J., Hwang I. Prevalence, correlates, and treatment of lifetime suicidal behavior among adolescents: results from the national comorbidity survey replication adolescent supplement. JAMA Psychiat. 2013;70(3):300–310. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hawton K., Harriss L. Deliberate self-harm in young people: characteristics and subsequent mortality in a 20-year cohort of patients presenting to hospital. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68:1574–1583. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources