ArticleScientific reports2026
Six-month outcomes in a French cohort of patients receiving a safety planning type intervention after suicide attempt.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Safety Planning Intervention (SPI) is an intervention validated by the Stanley team, as a strategy for preventing suicidal recurrence. It allows the patient to develop a personalized emergency plan that can be used in the event of a suicidal crisis In a previous study, it was shown that, in routine post-emergency clinical settings, that the SPI was well accepted by patients and feasible for healthcare professionals. Nevertheless, limited data exist regarding the long-term follow-up. The study aimed to assess the factors associated with the likelihood of recurrence of a suicide attempt at 6 months among patients who received SPI, as well as the usefulness of this brief intervention. This was alongitudinal cohort study with a six-month follow-up, involving patients hospitalized at Bichat Hospital (Paris, France) for a suicide attempt between June 2022 and December 2023, who received a SPI, aged over 18 years, agreeing to participate in the study. Self-questionnaires were conducted to assess mood and the presence of substance use disorders. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed, factors associated with suicide recurrence was based on a dichotomized variable, and a logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with recurrence. One month after inclusion, 85.4% of the patients still participating in the study remembered the SPI, and 68.8% still had their personalized SPI in their possession At six months, among the 40 patients contacted, 25.0% of of those still being followed had made another suicide attempt, and 70.0% of them had sought care at the emergency department. No factor was associated with the usefulness of the SPI. Regarding the probability of recurrence of a suicide attempt at 6 months, it appeared to decrease with increasing age (OR = 0.92, 95% CI [0.84 ; 0.99], p-value = 0.035). Being a student (OR = 5.25 95% CI [1.02 ; 26.98], p-value = 0.047)and a history of suicide attempts (OR = 9.00 95%CI [1.00 ; 80.8], p = 0.050) increased the odds of suicide reattempt at 6 months. In the multivariate analysis, a history of suicide attempt was the only factor independently associated with reattempt at 6 months (OR = 26.6 95%CI [1.28 ; 551.87], p-value = 0.034). This study supports potential importance of brief interventions in managing suicidal crises and preventing recurrence. This work makes it possible to propose new hypotheses regarding the importance of regularly revisiting suicide crisis prevention strategies throughout follow-up.
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.