Barriers to Help-Seeking in Suicidal Men: A Systematic Literature Review

{"title":"Barriers to Help-Seeking in Suicidal Men: A Systematic Literature Review","authors":"","doi":"10.33140/ijp.04.02.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The incidence of suicide in the United Kingdom is at its lowest since 1981 though the number remains catastrophic (Office for National Statistics, 2018). In particular, high rates of male suicidality causes a level of controversy, suggesting inadequate health service provisions and on an individual level, poor help-seeking (Macdonald, 2011; Möller-Leimkühler, 2003). Research has suggested that two thirds of males who had died by suicide had not been in contact with a mental health service (Luoma, Martin & Pearson, 2002; Owens, Booth, Briscoe, Lawrence & Lloyd, 2003). Studies have also identified the homogenous difficulties males experience when accessing the required care for suicidal ideation (Foster & Wu, 2002). The current review aimed to provide an overview of the research in this area, pertaining to the barriers to help-seeking in men experiencing suicidal ideation. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed on Web of Science and PsychInfo using truncations of the terms (help-seek*, behaviour*, suicid*, male*). Results: Of the 522 articles identified 7 papers were eligible for review. All of the papers provided qualitative findings. A synthesis of the data identified four reoccurring themes: masculinity, stigma, self-medicating and mislabelling pathology and four sub themes: social humiliation and self-humiliation, incorrect identification and false rejections by clinicians. The current literature, though entirely qualitative and somewhat homogeneous, revealed that males with suicidality when help-seeking experience specific barriers. Conclusion: Although the available literature has provided themes for study on how self and societal appraisals may impact help-seeking behaviours in males, comparative quantitative and longitudinal studies are required imminently to increase understanding and approach this health crisis effectively.","PeriodicalId":78321,"journal":{"name":"International journal of psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33140/ijp.04.02.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: The incidence of suicide in the United Kingdom is at its lowest since 1981 though the number remains catastrophic (Office for National Statistics, 2018). In particular, high rates of male suicidality causes a level of controversy, suggesting inadequate health service provisions and on an individual level, poor help-seeking (Macdonald, 2011; Möller-Leimkühler, 2003). Research has suggested that two thirds of males who had died by suicide had not been in contact with a mental health service (Luoma, Martin & Pearson, 2002; Owens, Booth, Briscoe, Lawrence & Lloyd, 2003). Studies have also identified the homogenous difficulties males experience when accessing the required care for suicidal ideation (Foster & Wu, 2002). The current review aimed to provide an overview of the research in this area, pertaining to the barriers to help-seeking in men experiencing suicidal ideation. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed on Web of Science and PsychInfo using truncations of the terms (help-seek*, behaviour*, suicid*, male*). Results: Of the 522 articles identified 7 papers were eligible for review. All of the papers provided qualitative findings. A synthesis of the data identified four reoccurring themes: masculinity, stigma, self-medicating and mislabelling pathology and four sub themes: social humiliation and self-humiliation, incorrect identification and false rejections by clinicians. The current literature, though entirely qualitative and somewhat homogeneous, revealed that males with suicidality when help-seeking experience specific barriers. Conclusion: Although the available literature has provided themes for study on how self and societal appraisals may impact help-seeking behaviours in males, comparative quantitative and longitudinal studies are required imminently to increase understanding and approach this health crisis effectively.
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
自杀男性求助障碍的系统文献综述
背景:英国的自杀率处于1981年以来的最低水平,尽管这一数字仍然是灾难性的(英国国家统计局,2018)。特别是,男性自杀率高会导致一定程度的控制,这表明医疗服务提供不足,而在个人层面上,寻求帮助的能力较差(Macdonald,2011;Möller-Lemkühler,2003年)。研究表明,自杀死亡的男性中有三分之二没有接触过心理健康服务(Luoma,Martin&Pearson,2002;Owens,Booth,Briscoe,Lawrence&Lloyd,2003年)。研究还确定了男性在获得必要的自杀意念护理时所经历的同质困难(Foster&Wu,2002)。目前的综述旨在概述这一领域的研究,涉及有自杀意念的男性寻求帮助的障碍。方法:在Web of Science和PsychInfo上使用术语(求助*、行为*、自杀*、男性*)进行系统的文献综述。结果:在522篇文章中,有7篇论文符合审查条件。所有论文都提供了定性研究结果。数据的综合确定了四个重复出现的主题:男性气概、污名化、自我治疗和错误标记病理学,以及四个子主题:社会羞辱和自我羞辱、临床医生的错误识别和虚假拒绝。目前的文献虽然完全是定性的,也有点同质,但揭示了男性在寻求帮助时会遇到特定的自杀障碍。结论:尽管现有文献为研究自我和社会评价如何影响男性求助行为提供了主题,但迫切需要进行比较定量和纵向研究,以提高对这一健康危机的理解和有效应对。
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
The Essential Interconnection of the Reticular Formation, Intermediolateral Nucleus, and Hypothalamus-Pituitary-Adrenal Axis: A Comprehensive View on Cellular Homeostasis Improving Behavioural and Social Skills in Children with Down Syndrome through Parent-Child Interaction Therapy: Effects on Parenting Skills and Stress in Caregivers The Impact of Stress on Academic Performance: Strategies for High School Students The New Human University Study: Structure-Stage Growth in a One Year Transformational Learning Program Effect of Viewing Children’s Movies in Literary Arabic on Kindergartners’ Oral Skills
×
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