ArticlePreventive medicine reports2024
Demographic variation in preferred sources for suicide prevention and mental health crisis services among U.S. adults.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Funding for Suicide Prevention and Crisis Services in US State Budgets.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Experiences and Perceptions of Crisis Text Services: Interview Study Among Young Adults With Suicidal Ideation.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Prevalence, Themes, and Partisan Differences in US State Legislator X Posts Mentioning Suicide: Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- County characteristics associated with behavioral health emergency medical services calls.Health affairs scholar · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Recent federal policy initiatives (e.g., 988 Lifeline, Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics) aim to increase access to mental health crisis services. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and correlates of U.S. adults reporting being "very likely" to reach out to different sources if they/a loved one were experiencing suicidality or a mental health crisis. Methods: A nationally representative Ipsos KnowledgePanel survey of 5,058 U.S. adults (response rate = 55.0 %) in English and Spanish was conducted in June 2023. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the reported likelihood of reaching out to five different sources of support in a crisis, controlling for past 30-day psychological distress and demographic characteristics. Results: One-in-four respondents (27.8 %; 95 % CI = 26.5 %, 29.0 %) were very likely to reach out to a crisis line and 33.6 % (95 % CI = 32.3 %, 34.9 %) were very likely to reach out to a mental health professional. A friend/family member was the most frequently identified source of support (44.7 %; 95 % CI = 43.4 %, 46.1 %). After adjustment, people of younger ages, male gender, and identifying as Republican had significantly lower odds of reporting being very likely to reach out to a crisis line and mental health professional. Black and Hispanic respondents had significantly higher odds of reporting being very likely to reach out to a crisis line and someone in their religious network than non-Hispanic Whites. Conclusions: Most U.S. adults report not being very likely to reach out to a crisis line or mental health professional if experiencing suicidality/crisis, although variation across demographic groups exists.
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.