ArticlePloS one2023
Association between visual impairment and risk of suicide: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visual Impairment and Suicide Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSuicide is an important public health problem. Well-established risk factors of suicide include depression, family history of mental disorders, substance problem, chronic physical illness, and others. Sensory impairment, especially visual impairment (VI), has a critical impact on both mental and physical health. However, the association between VI and risk of suicide has not been thoroughly investigated and remains controversial. Our aim is to systematically review and meta-analyze the current evidence on the association between VI and risk of suicide and to evaluate the direction and magnitude of the association. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We aim to search PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library to identify all population-based studies on the association between VI and risk of suicide. Two reviewers will independently conduct study selection, data extraction and risk of bias (ROB) assessment. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale will be applied to evaluate the methodologic quality of the included studies for ROB assessment. The primary outcome measure will be the relative risk (RR) of suicide, and the secondary outcome measures will be the risks of suicidal ideation (SI) and suicide attempt (SA). Estimates of risk with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for suicide, SI and SA, respectively, will be calculated and summarized. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses to combine the pooled effects. Meta-regression will be applied to investigate the effects of multiple factors across studies. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted for screening of any potential sources of heterogeneity. Publication bias will be evaluated by funnel plot and Begg and Mazumdar correlation testing. The body of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
conclusionThis article presents a study protocol for investigating the association between VI and risk of suicide. The findings of this study will contribute to our current knowledge of the impact of VI as a risk factor of suicide. In addition, meta-regression and subgroup analyses will provide further insights to factors affecting the association between VI and suicide risk.
trial registrationSystematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD 42022325106.
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.