ArticlePLOS mental health2024
Evaluation of a service introduced to support young people at risk of suicide using a cohort design, a mixed methods analysis and cost-benefit analysis.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Integrated Aftercare Support for Parents and Carers Following a Child's Suicide Attempt: A Qualitative Study.Journal of child and adolescent psychiatric nursing : official publication of the Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nurses, Inc · 2025Article
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
This evaluation sought to determine to what extent a suicide prevention service, designed for young people at severe risk of suicide, was successful in reducing suicide risk and distress and improving well-being outcomes. The 3-month service was co-designed at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in Melbourne, Australia, with young people and carers who had lived experience of youth suicide. The evaluation involved a mixed methods analysis of data collected during the first 20 months of operation, from February 2022 to September 2023. Ninety one young people were admitted to the service during this period, of whom 28 agreed to participate in the evaluation. Primary data were collected by telephone or online, and secondary data for hospital service use were collected for 70 of the young people. Analysis found that there were significant reductions in suicide risk and psychological distress at discharge, associated with significant improvements in quality of life and reductions in the use of hospital services. Qualitative analysis supported these survey results, highlighting the peer and psycho-social support as particularly beneficial aspects of the service. However, the qualitative analysis also indicated that some individuals felt the service was too short and abruptly ended, with insufficient attention paid to the creation and maintenance of support services that could continue after discharge. A small sample size was a limitation of this study, particularly for the three and six month follow-up surveys. Also, the cost-benefit analysis included secondary routine hospital admission data covering only 12 months. Nevertheless, the overall findings are positive, suggesting that services of this nature can have real benefits for young people at serious risk of suicide. It is likely that an extension of the cost-benefit analysis, to allow for benefits beyond a one year period, would have suggested that the benefits outweigh the costs.
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.