ArticleBMJ open2018
Suicide bereavement: piloting a longitudinal study in Australia.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Coping Styles Utilized during Suicide and Sudden Death Bereavement in the First Six Months.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Suicide exposure experience screener for use in therapeutic settings: A validation report.Suicide & life-threatening behavior · 2022Article
- "I lost so much more than my partner" - Bereaved partners' grief experiences following suicide or physician-assisted dying in case of a mental disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
- Experiences of Parental Suicide-Bereavement: A Longitudinal Qualitative Analysis Over Two Years.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A framework of meaning attribution following loss.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2020Article
- Parents' Experiences of Suicide-Bereavement: A Qualitative Study at 6 and 12 Months after Loss.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe pilot study were (1) to test the technical and administrative feasibility of a full-scale study, including recruitment process, response and retention rate, questionnaire design for an investigation to improve understanding of the suicide bereavement processes compared with bereavement by sudden deaths and (2) to present the differences and changes in the main outcomes-grief reactions of close relatives exposed to suicide and sudden death over 2 years.
designA longitudinal prospective study comparing bereavement by suicide to other types of sudden deaths over time (6, 12 and 24 months).
settingQueensland, Australia.
participants25 suicide-bereaved and 15 sudden-death-bereaved persons. OUTCOME MEASURES: Grief reactions (measured with the Grief Experience Questionnaire).
resultsThe response rate was 52.1% in the suicide bereaved and 45.5% in the sudden-death group. There was a small number of dropouts, with the retention rate over 85% for both groups. Linear mixed modelling for repeated measures showed a significant group effect (higher in suicide bereaved) for total grief, responsibility, rejection and unique reactions. A significant time effect (reduction) was measured for total grief, somatic reactions, general grief reactions and search for explanation. One significant time and group interaction was measured; rejection showed a decline in suicide and an increase in sudden-death bereaved.
conclusionsThe pilot study presented the appropriateness of the study methodology. This type of study has implications for counselling and treating people bereaved by suicide and for designing postvention activities.
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.