Issues in designing, implementing, and evaluating suicide prevention strategies

Kirsten Windfuhr
{"title":"Issues in designing, implementing, and evaluating suicide prevention strategies","authors":"Kirsten Windfuhr","doi":"10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Suicide is one of the leading causes of death globally. Suicide prevention has become a policy priority in many countries. Some countries have implemented national suicide prevention strategies, in line with guidance from the United Nations and the World Health Organization. However, there are still several issues that require further attention in relation to suicide prevention strategies. First, although a growing number of countries have adopted national suicide prevention strategies, suicide prevention is still not a health priority globally. Second, there is an ongoing debate regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of individual interventions. Although evidence on interventions from ‘gold standard’ studies (e.g. randomized controlled trials) is desirable, this is often not achievable. Using the best available evidence is a pragmatic approach to the development of suicide prevention strategies. Third, best practice is informed by evaluating what does and does not work. This requires an evaluation of both the efficacy of specific interventions and the effectiveness of suicide prevention strategies as health policy initiatives. A focus on international evaluation data would help to develop global understanding of best practice in relation to suicide prevention.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":88653,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry (Abingdon, England)","volume":"8 7","pages":"Pages 272-275"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.04.002","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry (Abingdon, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1476179309000664","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Suicide is one of the leading causes of death globally. Suicide prevention has become a policy priority in many countries. Some countries have implemented national suicide prevention strategies, in line with guidance from the United Nations and the World Health Organization. However, there are still several issues that require further attention in relation to suicide prevention strategies. First, although a growing number of countries have adopted national suicide prevention strategies, suicide prevention is still not a health priority globally. Second, there is an ongoing debate regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of individual interventions. Although evidence on interventions from ‘gold standard’ studies (e.g. randomized controlled trials) is desirable, this is often not achievable. Using the best available evidence is a pragmatic approach to the development of suicide prevention strategies. Third, best practice is informed by evaluating what does and does not work. This requires an evaluation of both the efficacy of specific interventions and the effectiveness of suicide prevention strategies as health policy initiatives. A focus on international evaluation data would help to develop global understanding of best practice in relation to suicide prevention.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
设计、实施和评估自杀预防策略的问题
自杀是全球死亡的主要原因之一。预防自杀已成为许多国家的优先政策。一些国家根据联合国和世界卫生组织的指导,实施了国家预防自杀战略。然而,在自杀预防策略方面仍有几个问题需要进一步关注。首先,尽管越来越多的国家采用了国家预防自杀战略,但预防自杀仍然不是全球卫生的优先事项。其次,关于个人干预措施的有效性和有效性存在持续的争论。虽然来自“金标准”研究(如随机对照试验)的干预措施证据是可取的,但这往往是无法实现的。利用现有的最佳证据是制定自杀预防战略的务实方法。第三,最佳实践是通过评估什么可行,什么不可行来获得信息的。这需要对具体干预措施的效力和作为卫生政策举措的自杀预防战略的效力进行评估。把重点放在国际评价数据上,将有助于在全球范围内了解预防自杀的最佳做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contents Editorial Board Mental illness, dangerousness and protecting society Personal autonomy and mental capacity The Mental Health Act and the Mental Capacity Act: untangling the relationship
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1