ArticleBMC psychiatry2017
How do healthcare professionals interview patients to assess suicide risk?
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Raising Suicide in Medical Appointments-Barriers and Facilitators Experienced by Young Adults and GPs: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Suicide Screening Tools for Pediatric Emergency Department Patients: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Pooled it
- "Hopeless but supported in that hopelessness": a qualitative study of how people experience talking to a GP about suicide.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Person-centred suicide prevention: key elements from the perspective of people living with suicidality.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025Article
- Review
- Practitioners' perspective: a mixed-methods study on dealing with suicidality from the perspective of oncological healthcare professionals.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Recognising and Responding to Suicide-Risk Factors in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.Journal of prevention (2022) · 2024Article
- On mental pain and suicide risk in modern psychiatry.Annals of general psychiatry · 2024Review
- Acceptability and content validity of suicidality screening items: a qualitative study with perinatal women.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Asking about self-harm during risk assessment in psychosocial assessments in the emergency department: questions that facilitate and deter disclosure of self-harm.BJPsych open · 2023Article
- How is suicide risk assessed in healthcare settings in the UK? A systematic scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Implying implausibility and undermining versus accepting peoples' experiences of suicidal ideation and self-harm in Emergency Department psychosocial assessments.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Observed behaviours and suicide assessment language post-Mental Health First Aid training in Australia and the United States: a mixed methods study using discourse analysis.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Magical thinking and moral injury: exclusion culture in psychiatry.BJPsych bulletin · 2022Review
- Working with Young People at Risk of Suicidal Behaviour and Self-Harm: A Qualitative Study of Australian General Practitioners' Perspectives.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Asking about suicide and self-harm: moving beyond clinician discomfort.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Article
- Core components and strategies for suicide and risk management protocols in mental health research: a scoping review.BMC psychiatry · 2021Article
- Introducing an innovative model of acute paediatric mental health and addictions care to paediatric emergency departments: a protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study.BMJ open quality · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is little evidence on how professionals communicate to assess suicide risk. This study analysed how professionals interview patients about suicidal ideation in clinical practice.
methodsThree hundred nineteen video-recorded outpatient visits in U.K. secondary mental health care were screened. 83 exchanges about suicidal ideation were identified in 77 visits. A convenience sample of 6 cases in 46 primary care visits was also analysed. Depressive symptoms were assessed. Questions and responses were qualitatively analysed using conversation analysis. χ
resultsA gateway closed question was always asked inviting a yes/no response. 75% of questions were negatively phrased, communicating an expectation of no suicidal ideation, e.g., "No thoughts of harming yourself?". 25% were positively phrased, communicating an expectation of suicidal ideation, e.g., "Do you feel life is not worth living?". Comparing these two question types, patients were significantly more likely to say they were not suicidal when the question was negatively phrased but were not more likely to say they were suicidal when positively phrased (χ
conclusionsPsychiatrists tend to ask patients to confirm they are not suicidal using negative questions. Negatively phrased questions bias patients' responses towards reporting no suicidal ideation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.