ReviewIndian journal of psychological medicine2025
Interpersonal Psychotherapy for Suicidal Risk: A Narrative Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Indian journal of psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose of the Review: This narrative review evaluates the effectiveness of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) among individuals at risk of suicide, with a focus on the quality of randomized controlled studies. Collection and Analysis of Data: The available literature was systematically searched on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Hinari-Research4Life, and ResearchGate to identify RCTs in which participants at risk of suicide received IPT compared to other forms of treatment. Extracted study data were organized into a table of evidence using Microsoft Excel and Word. The Risk of Bias 2 Excel tool was used to evaluate the possibility of bias. Out of 158 identified studies, six met the inclusion criteria for review and analysis, encompassing 1,275 participants, of whom 53.1% were randomized to IPT conditions. Among these studies, two demonstrated that IPT was effective in significantly reducing suicidal ideation and behaviors over time compared to treatment-as-usual or waitlist conditions. However, most studies did not report clinically significant outcomes, such as risk ratios, effect sizes, and confidence intervals (CIs) with Conclusions: The effectiveness of IPT in reducing suicidal risk was found to be imprecise due to incomplete reporting of results, indicating the need for further conclusive and evident research.
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.