ArticlePsycho-oncology2026
Methods of Suicide Used by People With Cancer: A Scoping Review.
Article in Psycho-oncology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals diagnosed with cancer are at increased risk of suicide compared to the general population. Access to means is a key volitional risk factor for suicide and represents a modifiable target for prevention at a population level. Understanding the methods of suicide in this group is crucial to inform targeted prevention strategies.
aimsThis scoping review aimed to examine the methods of suicide used by individuals with cancer, identify the types of study designs used to investigate this topic, and evaluate the feasibility of a future systematic review.
methodsThis scoping review followed JBI methodology and the PRISMA-ScR checklist. A comprehensive search was conducted in five databases: Medline (EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO), Embase (Elsevier), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), and Web of Science (Clarivate) and gray literature. Studies were eligible if they quantitatively reported suicide methods in individuals with cancer. Studies of non-fatal self-harm, case reports, or those lacking method-specific data were excluded.
resultsTwenty-seven studies from multiple countries were included. Method choice was influenced by geographical location, age, and sex. There was considerable heterogeneity in study design, cancer definitions, control groups used, and the characteristics of comparison samples reported.
conclusionsDue to substantial methodological variation, a systematic review is not currently feasible. Future research should, at a minimum, control for age and sex, include underrepresented populations, and adopt region-specific approaches.
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.