ArticleBMJ open2025
Safety planning interventions to address suicidality in adults: a protocol for a systematic review of the literature.
Article in BMJ open, 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
introductionSuicide is a significant public health issue worldwide. Many deaths by suicide occur in moments of crisis. Therefore, interventions which support individuals to manage moments of acute distress are needed. Safety Planning Interventions (SPI) are a group of brief interventions which aim to reduce imminent risk of suicide through the collaborative creation of a written set of coping strategies a person can use when suicidal ideation and/or urges occur. A number of studies, including systematic reviews, have supported the efficacy of SPIs in reducing suicidal behaviour, and sometimes ideation. However, there is notable heterogeneity in SPI effectiveness research. Our review aims to synthesise and critically examine the methodological characteristics of research on SPI effectiveness and to provide recommendations for the reporting of future research. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A predetermined search strategy will be used to search six electronic databases. Eligible studies will examine the effectiveness of SPIs for suicidality in adults aged 18+. There will be no restrictions to inclusion based on study design, study setting and participant characteristics. Two independent reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Disagreements between reviewers will be resolved by a third reviewer. Data gathered will include study design, participant characteristics, study setting, type of SPI delivered, theoretical approach used to guide research, outcomes measured and results reported. A narrative synthesis of the methodological characteristics of the included studies will be provided. Recommendations for the development and reporting of future research will be provided. Reporting of the review will be informed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as no original data will be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: This protocol has been registered on Prospero (registration ID CRD42025641027).
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.