Technology-based suicide prevention: An umbrella review.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Research in Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2024-07-11 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jrms.jrms_791_23
Sima Siadat, Ziba Farajzadegan, Narges Motamedi, Rasool Nouri, Nastaran Eizadi-Mood
{"title":"Technology-based suicide prevention: An umbrella review.","authors":"Sima Siadat, Ziba Farajzadegan, Narges Motamedi, Rasool Nouri, Nastaran Eizadi-Mood","doi":"10.4103/jrms.jrms_791_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The objective is to summarize evidence from systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and meta-analyses evaluating the effects of any format of Internet-based, mobile-, or telephone-based intervention as a technology-based intervention in suicide prevention.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is an umbrella review, that followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement guidelines. An electronic search was done on September 29, 2022. Data were extracted by reviewers and then methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed by A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2. Statistical analysis was done by STATA version 17. Standard mean difference was extracted from these studies and by random effect model, the overall pooled effect size (ES) was calculated. I2 statistic was used to assess the heterogeneity between studies. For publication bias, the Egger test was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six reviews were included in our study, all with moderate quality. The overall sample size was 24631. The ES for standard mean differences of the studies is calculated as - 0.20 with a confidence interval of (-0.26, -0.14). The heterogeneity is found as 58.14%, indicating a moderate-to-substantial one. The Egger test shows publication bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show that technology-based interventions are effective. We propose more rigorous randomized controlled trials with different control groups to assess the effectiveness of these interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","volume":"29 ","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11376711/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_791_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The objective is to summarize evidence from systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and meta-analyses evaluating the effects of any format of Internet-based, mobile-, or telephone-based intervention as a technology-based intervention in suicide prevention.

Materials and methods: This is an umbrella review, that followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement guidelines. An electronic search was done on September 29, 2022. Data were extracted by reviewers and then methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed by A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2. Statistical analysis was done by STATA version 17. Standard mean difference was extracted from these studies and by random effect model, the overall pooled effect size (ES) was calculated. I2 statistic was used to assess the heterogeneity between studies. For publication bias, the Egger test was used.

Results: Six reviews were included in our study, all with moderate quality. The overall sample size was 24631. The ES for standard mean differences of the studies is calculated as - 0.20 with a confidence interval of (-0.26, -0.14). The heterogeneity is found as 58.14%, indicating a moderate-to-substantial one. The Egger test shows publication bias.

Conclusion: Our results show that technology-based interventions are effective. We propose more rigorous randomized controlled trials with different control groups to assess the effectiveness of these interventions.

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
基于技术的自杀预防:综述。
背景:本研究旨在总结系统综述、范围界定综述和荟萃分析中的证据,这些证据评估了任何形式的基于互联网、手机或电话的干预措施作为预防自杀技术干预措施的效果:本综述遵循《2020 年系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目声明》指南。2022 年 9 月 29 日进行了电子检索。数据由审稿人提取,然后用《评估系统性综述的测量工具-2》评估方法学质量和偏倚风险。统计分析由 STATA 17 版本完成。从这些研究中提取标准平均差,并通过随机效应模型计算出总体效应大小(ES)。I2统计量用于评估研究之间的异质性。对于发表偏倚,则采用 Egger 检验:我们的研究共纳入了六篇综述,质量均为中等。总体样本量为 24631 个。经计算,研究的标准均值差异 ES 为 -0.20,置信区间为 (-0.26, -0.14)。异质性为 58.14%,表明存在中度到严重的异质性。Egger 检验显示存在发表偏倚:我们的研究结果表明,基于技术的干预措施是有效的。我们建议使用不同的对照组进行更严格的随机对照试验,以评估这些干预措施的有效性。
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
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
75
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online continuous journal with print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.jmsjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository.
期刊最新文献
A multistate survival model in rectal cancer surgery research for locally advanced patients. Cognitive function and brain magnetic resonance imaging profiles in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and multiple sclerosis. Epidemiology of malaria in saravan city and its suburbs from 2018 to 2023, Southeast Iran. Ethical guidelines for human research on children and adolescents: A narrative review study. Evaluation of the new modified apnea test in confirmation of brain death.
×
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