ArticleNursing open2024
How, Why and When: Nursing Staff's Experiences of Working With Suicide Risk Assessment Instruments.
Article in Nursing open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Explainable Artificial Intelligence Models for Predicting Depression Based on Polysomnographic Phenotypes.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
AIMS AND
objectivesTo describe psychiatric nursing staff´s experiences of working with suicide risk assessment instruments.
backgroundAround the world, approximately 720,000 people die by suicide each year, of which almost 20% have an ongoing contact with specialist psychiatry during their last month alive. To identify which patients have an increased risk of suicide is a highly important task for nursing staff. Suicidal behaviour is complex and unpredictable. Nursing staff work closely with patients in everyday psychiatric care and often possess unique patient knowledge. These professionals must therefore be able to know when a patient's eventual suicidality requires further attention and efforts.
designA descriptive qualitative study.
methodsConvenience sampling including nursing staff with more than 2 years of experience in specialist psychiatry. The data collection took place through semi-structured interviews and was then analysed according to conventional content analysis.
resultsThe nursing staff felt that a natural conversation is superior suicide risk assessment instruments and that experience and patient knowledge are the primary factors for facilitating a suicide risk assessment. This meant that some nursing staff rarely used suicide risk assessment instruments, although they sometimes could be a useful support in the conversation and provided a sense of personal security when documenting results.
conclusionSuicide risk assessment instrument can be significant and helpful in certain cases, but the essential components of a suicide risk assessment consist of a conversation to understand the meaning of suicide from the patient's perspective. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Psychiatric nursing staff contributed to this study by sharing their experiences through interviews.
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.