Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39391941›Full record

ArticleBJPsych bulletin2025

Clinical characteristics and suicidal ideation as predictors of suicide: prospective study of 1000 referrals to general adult psychiatry.

David Hayward, Blair Johnston, Donald J MacIntyre, Douglas Steele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

David HaywardNHS Lothian, Livingston, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6150-8783
Blair JohnstonNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.
Donald J MacIntyreNHS Lothian, Livingston, UK.
Douglas SteeleUniversity of Dundee, Dundee, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

methodQuestions often follow the suicide of someone who presented to general adult psychiatry (GAP) when expressing suicidal thoughts: 'Why were they not admitted, or managed differently, when they said they were suicidal?' Answering these questions requires knowledge of the prevalence of suicidal ideation in patients presenting to GAP. Therefore, we determined the general clinical characteristics, including suicidal ideation, of a large sample of patients presenting to a GAP emergency assessment service or referred as non-emergencies to a GAP service.

resultsSuicidal ideation was very common, being present in 76.4% of emergency presentations and 33.4% of non-emergency referrals. It was very weakly associated with suicide, varied between different diagnostic categories, and previous assessment by GAP did not appear to affect it. The suicide rate during the contingent episode of care was estimated as 66 per 100 000 episodes. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This, and other evidence, shows that suicide cannot be predicted with an accuracy that is useful for clinical decision-making. This is not widely appreciated but has serious consequences for patients and healthcare resources.

Indexed as

general adult psychiatrymortalityrisk assessmentsuicidal ideationSuicide

Identifiers

PMID39391941
PMCPMC12676238

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.