ArticleBMJ open2021
Peer support for youth suicide prevention: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peer-Led Models Focussed on Emotional Distress and Suicide Prevention: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Exploring the lived experience of receiving mental health crisis care at emergency departments, crisis phone lines and crisis care alternatives.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Integrative Analyses of scRNA-seq, Bulk mRNA-seq, and DNA Methylation Profiling in Depressed Suicide Brain Tissues.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2023Article
- Affiliation to a Social Group as a Preventive Factor in Suicidal Behaviors in Children and Adolescents during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionYouth suicide is a significant public health priority, and is the second leading cause of death among young people between 15 and 29 years of age. An emerging intervention in suicide prevention programming with youth is peer support. Although increasingly used in other settings, the evidence for peer support interventions in youth suicide prevention remains nascent. This article presents a protocol for a scoping review aimed at systematically mapping the current evidence on peer support for youth suicide prevention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework will guide the review methods. The search strategy will be developed with guidance from a health sciences librarian. Multiple databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and grey literature will be identified using terms related to peer support and youth suicide prevention. Publication date restrictions will not be applied. All identified records of published literature will be collated and uploaded to a systematic review management software, Covidence, for review and selection. Screening will be completed in duplicate by two reviewers using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Conflicts during screening will be resolved by a third reviewer. The title and abstract screening and full-text review will be completed in Covidence. Two reviewers will complete data extraction from the selected records, using a tailored extraction form. Screening and data extraction will be completed between January and April 2021. A narrative summary will be completed to synthesise key findings as well as contextual information about the use of peer support interventions in youth suicide prevention programming. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results will be disseminated through a community research report, presentations of findings at relevant conferences and academic publications of the scoping review protocol and results. The data used for this scoping review will be derived from published resources; therefore, ethics approval is not required for this study.
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.