Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38259744›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2023

Continuity of care in suicide prevention: current status and future directions.

Shay Arnon, Golan Shahar, Anat Brunstein Klomek

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Shay ArnonBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel.
Golan ShaharDepartment of Psychology, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er Sheva, Israel.
Anat Brunstein KlomekBaruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Continuity of Care (CoC) is central to suicide prevention. The present study aims to review contemporary definitions, operationalization in research, and key components of CoC in the prevention of suicide. Methods: The present study is a narrative review. A thorough search of available literature on CoC and suicidality was conducted. Studies published between 1995 and 2021 were reviewed and selected based on relevance to CoC and suicidality. Selected research was subsequently summarized to outline definitions of CoC, its operationalization in research, and key components for suicide prevention. Results: The definition, measurement, and operationalization of CoC in suicide prevention varies tremendously, derailing clinical practice. Key elements of CoC identified across the literature include (1) CoC across multiple levels of care, (2) the role of primary care providers and case managers in CoC of suicidal patients, (3) the importance of follow up contact with suicidal patients post-treatment, and (4) the role of national and institutional guidelines for CoC of suicidal patients. Limitations: There is a dearth of randomized controlled trials and insufficient evidence on specific populations. Conclusion: CoC refers to a wide, complex concept that must be broken down into specific categories that can provide more nuanced guidance of research and clinical implications.

Indexed as

SuicideContinuity of Patient CareHumansResearch DesignSuicidal Ideationchain of carecontinuity of caresuicidalitysuicidesuicide prevention

Identifiers

PMID38259744
PMCPMC10800998

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.