Help-seeking needs related to suicide prevention for individuals in contact with mental health services: A rapid scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structured Abstract Introduction Prior mental health care utilization presents an important window of opportunity for providing suicide prevention interventions. To date, no reviews have consolidated the help-seeking needs of individuals in contact with mental health services. This warrants further attention given this group may have different needs for interventions compared to the general population who have not sought help previously. Aim The purpose of this rapid scoping review was to summarize the available literature on help-seeking needs related to suicide prevention among individuals in contact with mental health services from healthcare settings. Method Cochrane rapid review and Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodologies were adapted, and databases, including MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and EMBASE, were searched. Results A total of 42 primary studies were included in analysis. Reported barriers and facilitators to help-seeking behaviors identified within studies were mapped onto the socio-ecological model. Barriers and facilitators identified included knowledge and attitudes toward healthcare utilization, family and peer support, interactions with healthcare professionals, provision of holistic care, and the creation of a supportive atmosphere and safe space to promote open discussions of suicide-related concerns. Discussion The findings of this review offer valuable insights into areas for improvement in addressing help-seeking needs for individuals who are in contact with health services related to suicide prevention. Implication for Research The findings serve as a foundation for shaping mental health initiatives informing approaches and care delivery tailored towards individuals who are in contact with health services. The reported barriers and facilitators offer insights to inform the development of mental health support tools to enhance care and considerations for evaluations. Accessible Summary What is known on the subject When individuals contact healthcare services while experiencing suicidal thoughts or behaviors, it is an important opportunity to offer them help and interventions to prevent suicide; however, this does not necessarily mean that their needs are always met. Previous research has identified abundant evidence on help-seeking barriers and facilitators for mental health support; however, we do not have a consolidated understanding of the help-seeking needs, including unmet needs, for individuals in contact with mental health services, which may differ from individuals who have not sought care recently. What the paper adds to existing knowledge This review consolidated the reasons why health service users might seek or avoid help when experiencing thoughts of suicide, organizing them as barriers and facilitators within the adapted socio-ecological model. What are the implications for research The findings from the review can form the basis for shaping mental health initiatives related to approaches and care delivery. The identified barriers and facilitators can provide valuable insights for designing mental health support tools and considerations for evaluations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.034 | 0.026 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".