Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorArensman, E.
dc.contributor.authorLarkin, Celine
dc.date2022-08-11T08:09:54.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T16:47:59Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T16:47:59Z
dc.date.issued2019-09-06
dc.date.submitted2019-10-15
dc.identifier.citation<p>BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Sep 6;19(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12888-019-2249-6. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-019-2249-6">Link to article on publisher's site</a></p>
dc.identifier.issn1471-244X (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12888-019-2249-6
dc.identifier.pmid31492119
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/41184
dc.description<p>Full author list omitted for brevity. For the full list of authors, see article.</p>
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Suicide has profound effects on families and communities, but is a statistically rare event. Psychological autopsies using a case-control design allow researchers to examine risk factors for suicide, using a variety of sources to detail the psychological and social characteristics of decedents and to compare them to controls. The Suicide Support and Information System Case Control study (SSIS-ACE) aimed to compare psychosocial, psychiatric and work-related risk factors across three groups of subjects: suicide decedents, patients presenting to hospital with a high-risk self-harm episode, and general practice controls. METHODS: The study design includes two inter-related studies; one main case-control study: comparing suicide cases to general practice (GP) controls, and one comparative study: comparing suicide cases to patients presenting with high-risk self-harm. Consecutive cases of suicide and probable suicide are identified through coroners' registration of deaths in the defined region (Cork City and County, Ireland) and are frequency-matched for age group and gender with GP patient controls recruited from the same GP practice as the deceased. Data sources for suicide cases include coroners' records, interviews with health care professionals and proxy informants; data sources for GP controls and for high-risk self-harm controls include interviews with control, with proxy informants and with health care professionals. Interviews are semi-structured and consist of quantitative and qualitative parts. The quantitative parts include a range of validated questionnaires addressing psychiatric, psychosocial and occupational factors. The study adopts several methodological innovations, including accessing multiple data sources for suicide cases and controls simultaneously, recruiting proxy informants to examine consistency across sources. CONCLUSIONS: The study allows for the investigation of consistency across different data sources and contributes to the methodological advancement of psychological autopsy research. The study will also inform clinical and public health practice. The comparison between suicide cases and controls will allow investigation of risk and protective factors for suicide more generally, while the comparison with high-risk self-harm patients will help to identify the factors associated specifically with a fatal outcome to a self-harm episode. A further enhancement is the particular focus on specific work-related risk factors for suicide.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=31492119&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p>
dc.rights© The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectCase-control
dc.subjectFamily informants
dc.subjectHigh-risk self-harm
dc.subjectMethodology
dc.subjectOccupational
dc.subjectPsychiatric
dc.subjectPsychological autopsy
dc.subjectPsychosocial
dc.subjectSuicide
dc.subjectCommunity Health and Preventive Medicine
dc.subjectPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms
dc.subjectPsychiatric and Mental Health
dc.subjectPsychiatry
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.subjectPsychology
dc.titlePsychosocial, psychiatric and work-related risk factors associated with suicide in Ireland: optimised methodological approach of a case-control psychological autopsy study
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleBMC psychiatry
dc.source.volume19
dc.source.issue1
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4988&amp;context=oapubs&amp;unstamped=1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/oapubs/3971
dc.identifier.contextkey15556530
refterms.dateFOA2022-08-23T16:47:59Z
html.description.abstract<p>BACKGROUND: Suicide has profound effects on families and communities, but is a statistically rare event. Psychological autopsies using a case-control design allow researchers to examine risk factors for suicide, using a variety of sources to detail the psychological and social characteristics of decedents and to compare them to controls. The Suicide Support and Information System Case Control study (SSIS-ACE) aimed to compare psychosocial, psychiatric and work-related risk factors across three groups of subjects: suicide decedents, patients presenting to hospital with a high-risk self-harm episode, and general practice controls.</p> <p>METHODS: The study design includes two inter-related studies; one main case-control study: comparing suicide cases to general practice (GP) controls, and one comparative study: comparing suicide cases to patients presenting with high-risk self-harm. Consecutive cases of suicide and probable suicide are identified through coroners' registration of deaths in the defined region (Cork City and County, Ireland) and are frequency-matched for age group and gender with GP patient controls recruited from the same GP practice as the deceased. Data sources for suicide cases include coroners' records, interviews with health care professionals and proxy informants; data sources for GP controls and for high-risk self-harm controls include interviews with control, with proxy informants and with health care professionals. Interviews are semi-structured and consist of quantitative and qualitative parts. The quantitative parts include a range of validated questionnaires addressing psychiatric, psychosocial and occupational factors. The study adopts several methodological innovations, including accessing multiple data sources for suicide cases and controls simultaneously, recruiting proxy informants to examine consistency across sources.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: The study allows for the investigation of consistency across different data sources and contributes to the methodological advancement of psychological autopsy research. The study will also inform clinical and public health practice. The comparison between suicide cases and controls will allow investigation of risk and protective factors for suicide more generally, while the comparison with high-risk self-harm patients will help to identify the factors associated specifically with a fatal outcome to a self-harm episode. A further enhancement is the particular focus on specific work-related risk factors for suicide.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathoapubs/3971
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Emergency Medicine
dc.source.pages275


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
s12888_019_2249_6.pdf
Size:
639.7Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver
(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.