Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33293324›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

What is known about the health service use and follow-up of immediate family members bereaved by suicide? Scoping review protocol.

Sindre Hoff Petersen, Jorid Kalseth, Silje L Kaspersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sindre Hoff PetersenDepartment of Health Research, SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9066-3654
Jorid KalsethDepartment of Health Research, SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway.
Silje L KaspersenDepartment of Health Research, SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway silje.l.kaspersen@sintef.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSuicide remains a major public health issue around the world. People bereaved by suicide are a vulnerable group who are at considerable risk of developing mental and physical health problems, such as complicated grief, post-traumatic stress disorder or cardiovascular disease. Many unanswered questions remain, in particular, in terms of their use of healthcare services. This protocol describes how we aim to systematically scope the existing literature on the professional follow-up and health service use by families bereaved by suicide. The scoping review will help to identify research gaps in the literature and aid in the planning and commission of future research. We will provide a summary of research findings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the scoping review framework provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews will be used as a guide for reporting our results. We plan to conduct an extensive literature search using relevant health-related databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL) and Web of Science. Two independent reviewers will screen the articles in a two-stage process: (1) titles and abstracts and (2) full-text documents. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review will identify and consider only previously published research. Hence, no ethical approval is considered necessary. We will disseminate the results in a scientific journal and at conferences, as well as through user organisations for people bereaved by suicide and social media.

Indexed as

Health ServicesPatient Acceptance of Health CareSocial MediaSuicideFamilyFamily HealthFollow-Up StudiesHumansScoping Reviews as Topichealth policyhealth services administration & managementquality in healthcaresuicide & self-harm

Identifiers

PMID33293324
PMCPMC7722818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.