Mareike Ernst , Tamara Schwinn , Judith Hirschmiller , Seonaid Cleare , Kathryn A. Robb , Elmar Brähler , Rüdiger Zwerenz , Jörg Wiltink , Rory C. O'Connor , Manfred E. Beutel
{"title":"在研究癌症患者自杀想法和行为的风险和保护因素时,在多大程度上考虑了心理变量?对 70 年研究的系统回顾","authors":"Mareike Ernst , Tamara Schwinn , Judith Hirschmiller , Seonaid Cleare , Kathryn A. Robb , Elmar Brähler , Rüdiger Zwerenz , Jörg Wiltink , Rory C. O'Connor , Manfred E. Beutel","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102413","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Psychological variables substantially shape the risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STBs). However, it is unclear to what extent they are considered in individuals with cancer. We synthesized the quantitative research landscape concerning psychological risk/protective factors of STBs in the (psycho-) oncological context.</p><p>This pre-registered review (PROSPERO-ID CRD42022331484) systematically searched the databases PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (as well as the grey literature and preprints). Risk of bias (RoB) was estimated using the ROBINS-I tool.</p><p>Of 11,159 retrieved records, 319 studies were eligible for inclusion. Of those, 163 (51.1%) had investigated psychological factors (affective: <em>n</em> = 155; social: <em>n</em> = 65; cognitive: <em>n</em> = 63; personality/individual differences: <em>n</em> = 37; life events: <em>n</em> = 6), in a combined 3,561,741 participants. The most common STBs were suicidal ideation (<em>n</em> = 107) or death wishes (<em>n</em> = 20) rather than behaviour (suicide deaths: <em>n</em> = 26; attempts: <em>n</em> = 14). Most studies had a serious RoB. Thus, a large body of research investigated STBs in cancer patients/survivors, but it rarely aligned with the theoretical or clinical developments in suicide research. We propose a conceptual model of STBs in cancer delineating moderation and mediation effects to advance the integration of the fields, and to inform future research and practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"109 ","pages":"Article 102413"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000345/pdfft?md5=b495c01c11b80213f60b17ed8e7aa210&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735824000345-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To what extent are psychological variables considered in the study of risk and protective factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviours in individuals with cancer? A systematic review of 70 years of research\",\"authors\":\"Mareike Ernst , Tamara Schwinn , Judith Hirschmiller , Seonaid Cleare , Kathryn A. Robb , Elmar Brähler , Rüdiger Zwerenz , Jörg Wiltink , Rory C. O'Connor , Manfred E. Beutel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102413\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Psychological variables substantially shape the risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STBs). However, it is unclear to what extent they are considered in individuals with cancer. We synthesized the quantitative research landscape concerning psychological risk/protective factors of STBs in the (psycho-) oncological context.</p><p>This pre-registered review (PROSPERO-ID CRD42022331484) systematically searched the databases PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (as well as the grey literature and preprints). Risk of bias (RoB) was estimated using the ROBINS-I tool.</p><p>Of 11,159 retrieved records, 319 studies were eligible for inclusion. Of those, 163 (51.1%) had investigated psychological factors (affective: <em>n</em> = 155; social: <em>n</em> = 65; cognitive: <em>n</em> = 63; personality/individual differences: <em>n</em> = 37; life events: <em>n</em> = 6), in a combined 3,561,741 participants. The most common STBs were suicidal ideation (<em>n</em> = 107) or death wishes (<em>n</em> = 20) rather than behaviour (suicide deaths: <em>n</em> = 26; attempts: <em>n</em> = 14). Most studies had a serious RoB. Thus, a large body of research investigated STBs in cancer patients/survivors, but it rarely aligned with the theoretical or clinical developments in suicide research. We propose a conceptual model of STBs in cancer delineating moderation and mediation effects to advance the integration of the fields, and to inform future research and practice.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"109 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000345/pdfft?md5=b495c01c11b80213f60b17ed8e7aa210&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735824000345-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000345\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000345","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
To what extent are psychological variables considered in the study of risk and protective factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviours in individuals with cancer? A systematic review of 70 years of research
Psychological variables substantially shape the risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STBs). However, it is unclear to what extent they are considered in individuals with cancer. We synthesized the quantitative research landscape concerning psychological risk/protective factors of STBs in the (psycho-) oncological context.
This pre-registered review (PROSPERO-ID CRD42022331484) systematically searched the databases PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (as well as the grey literature and preprints). Risk of bias (RoB) was estimated using the ROBINS-I tool.
Of 11,159 retrieved records, 319 studies were eligible for inclusion. Of those, 163 (51.1%) had investigated psychological factors (affective: n = 155; social: n = 65; cognitive: n = 63; personality/individual differences: n = 37; life events: n = 6), in a combined 3,561,741 participants. The most common STBs were suicidal ideation (n = 107) or death wishes (n = 20) rather than behaviour (suicide deaths: n = 26; attempts: n = 14). Most studies had a serious RoB. Thus, a large body of research investigated STBs in cancer patients/survivors, but it rarely aligned with the theoretical or clinical developments in suicide research. We propose a conceptual model of STBs in cancer delineating moderation and mediation effects to advance the integration of the fields, and to inform future research and practice.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology.
While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.