MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402343658 · doi:10.1111/jpm.13102

Help‐Seeking Needs Related to Suicide Prevention for Individuals in Contact With Mental Health Services: A Rapid Scoping Review

2024· article· en· W4402343658 on OpenAlexafffund
Hwayeon Danielle Shin, Jessica Kemp, Samantha Groves, Laura Bennett‐Poynter, Charlotte Pape, Karen Lascelles, Gillian Strudwick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersOxford Health NHS Foundation TrustCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOMental healthPsychological interventionNursingMedicineMEDLINEHealth careScopusSuicide preventionPoison controlPsychologyPsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Prior mental healthcare utilisation 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 with the general population who have not sought help previously. AIM: The purpose of this rapid scoping review was to summarise 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 behaviours identified within studies were mapped onto the socio-ecological model. Barriers and facilitators identified included knowledge and attitudes towards healthcare utilisation, 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.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.008
Bibliometrics0.0300.024
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.381 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207