Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38267895›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2024

Best practice for integrating digital interventions into clinical care for young people at risk of suicide: a Delphi study.

Eleanor Bailey, India Bellairs-Walsh, Nicola Reavley, Piers Gooding, Sarah Hetrick, Simon Rice, Alexandra Boland, Jo Robinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2024. 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. Trial
  2. Reducing the 'Silence Between Sessions': A Qualitative Study on Youth and Professionals' Perspectives on Digital Tools for Suicide Prevention.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    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

8 authors.

Eleanor BaileyOrygen, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. eleanor.bailey@orygen.org.au.
India Bellairs-WalshOrygen, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Nicola ReavleyMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Grattan Street, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Piers GoodingMelbourne Law School, University of Melbourne, Grattan Street, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Sarah HetrickFaculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, 22-30 Park Ave, Grafton, Auckland, 1023, New Zealand.
Simon RiceOrygen, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Alexandra BolandOrygen, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Jo RobinsonOrygen, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital tools have the capacity to complement and enhance clinical care for young people at risk of suicide. Despite the rapid rise of digital tools, their rate of integration into clinical practice remains low. The poor uptake of digital tools may be in part due to the lack of best-practice guidelines for clinicians and services to safely apply them with this population.

methodsA Delphi study was conducted to produce a set of best-practice guidelines for clinicians and services on integrating digital tools into clinical care for young people at risk of suicide. First, a questionnaire was developed incorporating action items derived from peer-reviewed and grey literature, and stakeholder interviews with 17 participants. Next, two independent expert panels comprising professionals (academics and clinical staff; n = 20) and young people with lived experience of using digital technology for support with suicidal thoughts and behaviours (n = 29) rated items across two consensus rounds. Items reaching consensus (rated as "essential" or "important" by at least 80% of panel members) at the end of round two were collated into a set of guidelines.

resultsOut of 326 individual items rated by the panels, 188 (57.7%) reached consensus for inclusion in the guidelines. The endorsed items provide guidance on important topics when working with young people, including when and for whom digital tools should be used, how to select a digital tool and identify potentially harmful content, and identifying and managing suicide risk conveyed via digital tools. Several items directed at services (rather than individual clinicians) were also endorsed.

conclusionsThis study offers world-first evidence-informed guidelines for clinicians and services to integrate digital tools into clinical care for young people at risk of suicide. Implementation of the guidelines is an important next step and will hopefully lead to improved uptake of potentially helpful digital tools in clinical practice.

Indexed as

SuicideAdolescentConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansRisk ManagementSuicidal IdeationClinical servicesDelphi methodDigitalSelf-harmSuicideYouth

Identifiers

PMID38267895
PMCPMC10809499

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.