ArticleSuicide & life-threatening behavior2021
Introducing the Psychological Autopsy Methodology Checklist.
Article in Suicide & life-threatening behavior, 2021. 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.
- Psychological autopsy studies of physician and nurse suicide: A narrative summary and synthesis of circumstantial and psychological aspects of death.Journal of public health research · 2026Review
- Article
- The role of informal caregivers in suicide prevention for men- findings from a psychological autopsy study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Completed suicide risk factors among people living with HIV in Hunan Province identified through a psychological autopsy case-control study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Psychosocial and psychiatric factors preceding death by suicide: A case-control psychological autopsy study involving multiple data sources.Suicide & life-threatening behavior · 2022Article
- [Is the role of mental illness in suicide overestimated?]Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2022Review
- Psychological autopsy study of suicide risk factors in the Colombian Coffee Region, 2017-2019.Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCase-control psychological autopsy studies are the research standard for the postmortem, quantitative study of ongoing or recent risk factors for suicide. We aimed to develop a reliable checklist of methodological quality of these studies.
methodWe adapted items from a validated checklist to address general methodological elements and created novel items to address the unique aspects of psychological autopsy research to generate a 16-item checklist assessing reporting, external validity, internal validity, and power. We used percent agreement and kappa to evaluate inter-rater reliability of the items and overall checklist based on independent ratings of 26 case-control psychological autopsy studies conducted internationally. We also summed the items to generate overall quality ratings, assessing internal consistency with coefficient alpha (α).
resultsInter-rater reliability for the overall checklist was high (percent agreement, 86.5%) and that based conservatively on kappa was substantial (κ .71) whereas internal consistency was low (α = 0.56). The inter-rater reliability of the individual items showed acceptable to high agreement.
conclusionA novel checklist provides a reliable means to assess the methodological quality of specific elements of quantitative case-control psychological autopsy studies, providing detailed guidance in planning such studies. Lower internal consistency may limit its utility as a summary measure of study quality.
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.