ArticleNew solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS2026
Rationale for Accreditation Criteria for the MATES in Construction Workplace Suicide Prevention Program.
Article in New solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MATES in Construction originated in Australia as a workplace suicide prevention program for predominantly male, blue-collar industries with high suicide rates. Accreditation criteria were developed for the purpose of providing recognition for participating sites and promoting the program. Arising from an internal review of the MATES accreditation criteria, this article presents the purpose and history of MATE's accreditation criteria; the rationale and evidence underpinning the accreditation criteria; and the evolving practice of accreditation in the MATES context.Four accreditation criteria are specified, addressing the 3 levels of the prevention and early treatment spectrum for mental health and illness interventions (universal/selective/indicated): (1) All the available workforce on a work site must be offered General Awareness Training (GAT, universal); (2) Following initial GAT training, at least 80% of the workforce is GAT trained (universal); (3) All workers must have a "line of sight" to a worker/volunteer trained in how to connect people to help (selective); (4) the work site must be able to access an Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Trained person during operational hours (indicated).MATES programs continue to evolve, possibly warranting additional accreditation criteria in the future to acknowledge the implementation of increasingly comprehensive programs.The extent to which the MATES justification for and approach to accreditation is generalizable to other contexts is not known; however, the underlying principles and rationale provided are likely adaptable in other contexts.
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.