Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37005568›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

A systems science approach to identifying data gaps in national data sources on adolescent suicidal ideation and suicide attempt in the United States.

Philippe J Giabbanelli, Ketra L Rice, Nisha Nataraj, Margaret M Brown, Christopher R Harper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Philippe J GiabbanelliDepartment of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Miami University, 205W Benton Hall, High St, Oxford, OH, 45056, USA. giabbapj@miamioh.edu.
Ketra L RiceNational Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA, USA.
Nisha NatarajNational Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA, USA.
Margaret M BrownDefense Suicide Prevention Office (DSPO), Department of Defense, Washington, DC, USA.
Christopher R HarperNational Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuicide is currently the second leading cause of death among adolescents ages 10-14, and third leading cause of death among adolescents ages 15-19 in the United States (U.S). Although we have numerous U.S. based surveillance systems and survey data sources, the coverage offered by these data with regard to the complexity of youth suicide had yet to be examined. The recent release of a comprehensive systems map for adolescent suicide provides an opportunity to contrast the content of surveillance systems and surveys with the mechanisms listed in the map.

objectiveTo inform existing data collection efforts and advance future research on the risk and protective factors relevant to adolescent suicide.

methodsWe examined data from U.S. based surveillance systems and nationally-representative surveys that included (1) observations for an adolescent population and (2) questions or indicators in the data that identified suicidal ideation or suicide attempt. Using thematic analysis, we evaluated the codebooks and data dictionaries for each source to match questions or indicators to suicide-related risk and protective factors identified through a recently published suicide systems map. We used descriptive analysis to summarize where data were available or missing and categorized data gaps by social-ecological level.

resultsApproximately 1-of-5 of the suicide-related risk and protective factors identified in the systems map had no supporting data, in any of the considered data sources. All sources cover less than half the factors, except the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (ABCD), which covers nearly 70% of factors.

conclusionsExamining gaps in suicide research can help focus future data collection efforts in suicide prevention. Our analysis precisely identified where data is missing and also revealed that missing data affects some aspects of suicide research (e.g., distal factors at the community and societal level) more than others (e.g., proximal factors about individual characteristics). In sum, our analysis highlights limitations in current suicide-related data availability and provides new opportunities to identify and expand current data collection efforts.

Indexed as

Suicidal IdeationSuicide, AttemptedAdolescentAdultChildHumansInformation SourcesRisk FactorsSuicide PreventionSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesYoung AdultCausal mapData collectionSurveillance systemYouth suicide

Identifiers

PMID37005568
PMCPMC10067278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.