ArticlePloS one2022
Co-creating safe spaces: Study protocol for translational research on innovative alternatives to the emergency department for people experiencing emotional distress and/or suicidal crisis.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing guidelines for supporting employees disclosing suicidal distress while working: a Delphi expert consensus study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Experiences providing care to patients with mental health conditions in a tertiary care hospital emergency department in Jerusalem.PloS one · 2026Article
- "I finally found a place where I could have some safety": A mixed-methods evaluation of non-clinical safe spaces for emotional distress and/or suicidal crisis.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Imagining a Safe Space: Australian Community Views About What Makes Crisis Mental Health Services 'Safe' and 'Unsafe'.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Safe spaces as an alternative to the emergency department for suicidal distress: exploring guests' experiences.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Co-Design or Faux-Design? Reflections on Co-Designing Safe Spaces for People in Emotional Distress or Suicidal Crisis in Australia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Reinventing the evaluation wheel: COGwheel's co-designed digital innovation using the Qualtrics heat map.MethodsX · 2025Article
- Co-Creation in Research: Further Reflections From the 'Co-Creating Safe Spaces' Project.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Birang Daruganora: what do Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities need in a new hospital? A qualitative study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- 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
- Co-ideation and co-design in co-creation research: Reflections from the 'Co-Creating Safe Spaces' project.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Evaluating implementation preparedness for suicide screening and referral in a Nepali emergency department: A mixed-methods study.Implementation research and practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSafe spaces are an alternative to emergency departments, which are often unable to provide optimum care for people experiencing emotional distress and/or suicidal crisis. At present, there are several different safe space models being trialled in Australia. However, research examining the effectiveness of safe space models, especially in community settings, is rare. In this paper, we present a protocol for a study in which we will investigate the implementation, effectiveness, and sustainability of safe space models as genuine alternatives for people who might usually present to the emergency department or choose not to access help due to past negative experiences. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe will use a mixed methods, co-designed study design, conducted according to the principles of community-based participatory research to obtain deep insights into the benefits of different safe space models, potential challenges, and facilitators of effective practice. We developed the study plan and evaluation framework using the RE-AIM framework, and this will be used to assess key outcomes related to reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Data collection will comprise quantitative measures on access, use, satisfaction, (cost) effectiveness, distress, and suicidal ideation; and qualitative assessments of service implementation, experience, feasibility, acceptability, community awareness, and the fidelity of the models to service co-design. Data will be collected and analysed concurrently throughout the trial period of the initiatives. DISCUSSION: This study will enable an extensive investigation of safe spaces that will inform local delivery and provide a broader understanding of the key features of safe spaces as acceptable and effective alternatives to hospital-based care for people experiencing emotional distress and/or suicidal crisis. This study will also contribute to a growing body of research on the role and benefits of peer support and provide critical new knowledge on the successes and challenges of service co-design to inform future practice.
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.