ArticleBMC public health2020
Perceptions of LGBQ+ youth and experts of suicide prevention video messages targeting LGBQ+ youth: qualitative study.
Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of the Impacts of Media Mental Health Awareness Campaigns on Young People.Health promotion practice · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- [Mental health of sexual and gender minority youth in Austria: scoping review and research agenda based on international evidence].Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundYoung lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer as well as other sexual/gender minorities (LGBTQ+) persons have higher rates of suicidal ideation and behavior compared to their non-LGBTQ+ peers, particularly during their coming out. The "It Gets Better" project is a multi-national media campaign that aims to reduce suicide among LGBTQ+ adolescents by providing personal narratives of hope delivered by mainly adult LGBTQ+ persons. There is only little knowledge so far on how young LGBTQ+ people as well as experts in suicide prevention and counseling perceive these videos, and how to potentially improve the videos based on their perceptions.
methodsA total of n = 19 LGBQ+ adolescents and young adults and n = 9 experts participated in focus groups to discuss perceptions of a selection of "It Gets Better" videos. Eight focus groups were conducted to assess perceptions on the process of watching the videos, possible effects on young LGBQ+ viewers in general, and suicidal LGBQ+ youth in particular, as well as factors that were relevant to their perceptions.
resultsMessages were found to be helpful in terms of promoting hope. LGBQ+ youth identified several key strategies to increase identification with messages, which they considered crucial for their effectiveness. Criticism emerged from a perceived lack of diversity in terms of portrayed sexual identities, and some shallowness in the portrayal of suicidal ideation and how things can get better. The experts' perceptions of the videos were largely consistent with LGBQ+ youth, highlighting a positive potential of videos to support coming out and identity building processes.
conclusionsYoung people and experts view the videos as helpful and relevant, but identified several strategies to better tailor them to the needs of LGBTQ+ adolescents, including suicidal peers. The insights gained are useful to the increasing number of suicide prevention projects using personal narratives of coping delivered via media to help prevent suicide.
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.