ArticleInternational journal of geriatric psychiatry2023
A qualitative study of multiple voices to inform aftercare services for older persons following self-harm.
Article in International journal of geriatric psychiatry, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revisiting suicide prevention in later life: mixed-methods study protocol.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Attempted suicide short intervention program for older adults 65+ (ASSIP-OA): a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
- Mortality in people living with dementia who self-harmed: An Australian data linkage study.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2024Article
- Psychogeriatric experts' experiences with risk factors of non-suicidal and suicidal self-injury in older adults: A qualitative study.Qualitative research in medicine & healthcare · 2024Article
- A qualitative study of multiple voices to inform aftercare services for older persons following self-harm.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2023Article
- 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSelf-harm and suicide are closely related in older adults, highlighting the opportunity for Aftercare interventions in targeted suicide prevention. The study aims were to explore strengths and shortfalls of current Aftercare services for older adults from the perspective of key stakeholders and researchers; and inform a set of guiding principles for older persons' Aftercare.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were undertaken with a convenience sample of older people with lived experience of self-harm, clinicians and suicide researchers (n = 22). Interviews were focussed on current practice (strengths and limitations), potential improvements, and identifying the core components of an acceptable Aftercare model. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and subjected to a reflexive thematic analysis grounded in interpretive description.
resultsCurrent practice strengths included validation, a person-centred approach and optimising aftercare delivery. Limitations included ageism, practical limitations (lack of service awareness, fragmented service provision, barriers to access, and traumatising approaches), and limited services, funding and training. Overarching themes included anti-ageism; anti-stigma; empowerment and agency; conveying hope; patience and pace; accessible; and finding purpose: connections and meaningful activity.
conclusionsOlder people who have self-harmed have complex, individualised needs. They sit within intersecting systems traversing healthcare, support services, family, and the social environment. Systemic, coordinated Aftercare founded upon core principles of anti-ageism, anti-stigma, partnership, empowerment, accessibility and provision of connections and meaning are needed.
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.