ArticleInternational journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being2021
A call for change from impersonal risk assessment to a relational approach: professionals' reflections on the national guidelines for suicide prevention in mental health care in Norway.
Article in International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- The developmental process of suicidal ideation among adolescents: social and psychological impact from a nation-wide survey.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Using the stress-vulnerability model to better understand suicide in prison populations.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2023Article
- Suicide Models and Treatment Models Are Separate Entities. What Does It Mean for Clinical Suicide Prevention?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of the study is to explore how professionals working with suicide prevention experience the influence of the national guidelines on mental healthcare, and to gather recommendations for which steps to take next.
methodsThis is a qualitative study with an explorative design. We interviewed 22 professionals responsible for implementing suicide prevention action plans and guidelines, and/or conducting relevant research. We analysed the data by means of thematic analysis.
resultsWe found that the participants had an ambivalent view on risk assessment-it may be a tool, but it may also compromise other important aspects in prevention. Moreover, the possibility of liability has resulted in the need for self-protection. Instead, the participants recommended a relational approach to suicide prevention.
conclusionsWe found that the emphasis on standardized suicide risk assessment has negatively influenced suicide prevention in mental healthcare, and an approach emphasizing relational aspects is recommended. However, the prevailing objectifying concept of knowledge, the epistemological debate and the emergence of the New Public Management ideology may obstruct a fundamental emphasis on relationships. A paradigm shift in mental healthcare is called for with respect to the concept of knowledge, which forms our understandings and practices.
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.