ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2025
Practitioners' perspective: a mixed-methods study on dealing with suicidality from the perspective of oncological healthcare professionals.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Qualitative Study of Professionals' Perspectives of Caring for People With Head and Neck Cancer Experiencing Suicidal Ideation.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Uncovering the realities of suicidal ideation in older patients following lung cancer diagnosis: an interpretive phenomenological qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Nursing Care to Reduce Suicide Risk in Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review of the Literature.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHealthcare professionals (HCPs) play a critical role in suicide prevention and clinical guidelines recommend inquiring about suicidality as part of medical history and diagnosis. Emerging evidence indicates a lack of implementation of such policies in clinical practice. However, to date, no comprehensive mixed-methods study has examined this issue in the field of oncology.
methodsA preregistered mixed-methods study was conducted with oncological HCPs (N = 20) from various professions, using semi-structured interviews and validated questionnaires. Employing an explorative theory-generating approach, qualitative content analysis was applied to the interviews. The different data sources are integrated and contrasted. Comparisons according to sociodemographic variables (profession, age, and gender) and frequency distributions were used to examine the questionnaire data.
resultsMost HCPs reported direct or indirect experiences with suicidality in cancer patients. Nineteen HCPs did not routinely explore suicidality, of whom five reported not inquiring about it at all. Those who explored suicidality were more confident, less emotionally overwhelmed and reported higher subjective knowledge. HCPs also differed regarding their endorsement of suicide myths.
conclusionThe study highlights difficulties with active suicide exploration and differences among HCPs. Integrating these findings into education and training could improve HCPs' skills and reduce disparities, supporting successful suicide prevention.
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.