ReviewGeneral hospital psychiatry
Neurobiological research with suicidal participants: A framework for investigators.
Review in General hospital psychiatry. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementing a suicide risk management protocol as part of a multisite clinical trial: Findings and lessons learned.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- Mechanistic Underpinnings of Emotional Face Processing in Suicide Risk: Exploring the Moderating Effects of Cortisol on Neural Parameters Using Magnetoencephalography.Psychiatric research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- Clinical indicators of the suicide crisis and response to ketamine.Journal of affective disorders · 2025Article
- Potential association between suicide risk, aggression, impulsivity, and the somatosensory system.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2024Article
- Clinical and electrophysiological correlates of hopelessness in the context of suicide riskEuropean neuropsychopharmacology : the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Clinical Trials With Suicidal Individuals Can Be Conducted Safely.The Journal of clinical psychiatry · 2020Article
- Network Changes in Insula and Amygdala Connectivity Accompany Implicit Suicidal Associations.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSuicide is a public health threat. Nevertheless, the research literature on actively suicidal participants is relatively sparse, in part because they are often excluded from medical, psychiatric, and psychological research for a host of logistical, ethical, and safety concerns. These obstacles to research participation and enrollment may contribute to our lack of understanding regarding the neurobiology of the suicidal crisis as well as to the dearth of evidence concerning both risk prediction and treatment.
methodIn order to directly investigate neurobiological markers of acute suicide risk, the National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research Program (NIMH-IRP) implemented the Neurobiology of Suicide protocol. In this protocol, actively suicidal individuals consent to research for both neurobiological assessment and potential rapid-acting interventions. RESULTS AND
conclusionsThis article reviews lessons learned from implementing this protocol in the hopes of assisting future research on the neurobiology of suicide. Areas of specific discussion include the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), recruitment and informed consent, participant monitoring, and the safety of the physical environment.
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.