Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40182513›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

Working with clients engaging in recurrent suicidal behavior: impacts on community mental health practitioners.

Megan Collisson, Jacinta Hawgood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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

2 authors.

Megan CollissonAustralian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Suicide Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Jacinta HawgoodAustralian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Suicide Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Practitioners have reported negative emotional impacts following client suicide. However, there is a paucity of literature exploring the impacts of working with clients engaging in suicidal behavior and on the impacts of repeat exposure to these events from the perspectives of practitioners. Aim: This qualitative study aimed to investigate the perceived impacts of working with clients engaging in recurrent suicidal behavior on Australian community mental health practitioners. Method: A phenomenological approach was utilized to explore the experiences of practitioners working with this client cohort; the impacts on them, the supports and resources used to sustain them and those perceived as necessary to increase the future sustainability of this important workforce. Eight practitioners were recruited via criterion snowball sampling to participate in semi-structured interviews up to a maximum of 45 min duration. Results: Participants were comprised of mental health clinicians ( Conclusion: While workplaces have a role to play in providing supports to reduce impacts on workers, further systemic work is required to increase sustainability of this workforce.

Indexed as

Community Mental Health ServicesHealth PersonnelSuicidal IdeationAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRecurrenceimpacts of suicidemental health workforcerecurrent suicidal behaviorsuicide prevention workforcesystemic workplace issues

Identifiers

PMID40182513
PMCPMC11966455

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.