Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42904875›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Navigating Suicide-Related Online Content in Individuals With Lived Experience of Suicidality: Cross-Sectional Survey.

Jacob Greaves, Dafni Katsampa, Lydia Grace, Ciara Harris, Anna Lavis, Ian Marsh, Lisa Marzano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jacob Greaves *Middlesex University, London, England, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-7534-1516
Dafni KatsampaSamaritans, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7254-1653
Lydia GraceSamaritans, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2898-4120
Ciara HarrisUniversity of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, England, B15 2TT, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8985-1359
Anna Lavis *University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, England, B15 2TT, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1080-2512
Ian MarshCanterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3576-4724
Lisa MarzanoMiddlesex University, London, England, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9735-3512

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Engagement with suicide-related content online is often assumed to be harmful, yet many individuals with lived experience describe such content as supportive or even life-preserving. Despite policy and clinical concerns, little is known about how people intentionally or unintentionally encounter this content, how they interpret it, and how these experiences shape perceived harm or benefit. Objective: This study aims to explore how intent and context influence the ways in which individuals with lived experience of suicidality encounter, interpret, and respond to suicide-related online content, and to identify factors associated with perceived harm and benefit. Methods: An exploratory cross-sectional survey was conducted with a convenience sample of 713 UK-based participants aged 16 to 60 years and older, 95.9% (n=684) of whom reported having lived experience of suicidality. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including chi-square tests, to examine associations between engagement patterns, intent, and suicidality. Free-text responses were coded using content analysis to identify categories relating to motivations for engagement, emotional responses, and perceived impact. Results: Participants reported a broad range of experiences. While 30.0% (214/713) described suicide-related content as contributing to suicidal thoughts or attempts, others reported relief, validation, or reduced feelings of isolation, with 21.0% (150/713) attributing content to preventing an attempt. Clear differences emerged between participants who actively sought out content ("seekers") and those who encountered it unintentionally ("stumblers"). Seekers more frequently reported positive or understanding responses, often in the context of unmet offline support needs, whereas stumblers were more likely to report shock or distress. Approximately 39.9% (151/378) of participants described their engagement as neither intentional nor accidental, potentially reflecting a blurred boundary between passive exposure and active seeking, as well as the difficulty individuals face in accurately identifying and articulating their own motivations in relation to suicidality. Conclusions: Engagement with suicide-related online content cannot be characterized as uniformly harmful. Outcomes depend on user intent, emotional state, and the context of engagement, and they may change over time. Clinical, regulatory, and policy approaches should move beyond risk-only frameworks to account for the nuanced and sometimes supportive roles such content plays in how individuals make sense of suicidal thoughts, while still protecting those at risk.

Indexed as

InternetSuicidal IdeationSuicideAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDigital MediaFemaleHumansIntentionMaleMiddle AgedUnited KingdomYoung Adultlived experienceonline safetysocial mediasuicide contentuser intent

Identifiers

PMID42904875
PMCPMC13685424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.