Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40459827›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2025

Suicide Risk Assessments Understood as Medical Rituals: Functions and Implications from Societal and Medico-Ethical Perspectives.

Antoinette Lundahl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 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

1 author.

Antoinette LundahlStockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. antoinette.lundahl@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0003-4920-7187

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of suicide risk assessments in individual psychiatric treatment is widespread and, in many countries, mandatory. However, these assessments exhibit poor predictive accuracy and offer limited clinical value. This raises the question of whether non-medical reasons underpin their continued use. In this paper, suicide risk assessments are interpreted as medical rituals-formalized, repetitive behaviours imbued with symbolic significance that fulfil social functions. Several such functions are proposed, including uniting care providers around shared values in suicide prevention, fostering a sense of safety and control over suicidal behaviour, projecting accountability, and signalling to the public that action is being taken. However, this practice may inadvertently lead to an increase in non-beneficial compulsory admissions, flawed prioritization of patients, and the proliferation of defensive medicine. While the ritualistic use of suicide risk assessments may serve important societal purposes, their potential to harm individual patients renders them indefensible from a medico-ethical standpoint.Instead, evidence-based suicide preventive interventions are recommended. These include implementing general safety measures, equipping psychiatric patients with safety plans, and providing effective mental health treatment according to medical needs.

Indexed as

Ceremonial BehaviorSuicideSuicide PreventionEthics, MedicalHumansMental DisordersRisk AssessmentMedical ethicsRitualsSuicide preventionSuicide risk assessments

Identifiers

PMID40459827
PMCPMC12783294

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.