为自杀者遗属提供支持的干预措施的有效性感知。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Laura Hofmann, Adelia Khrisna Putri, Alexandra Pitman, Jason Bantjes, Dolores Angela Castelli Dransart, Hilary Causer, Julie Cerel, Amy Chow, Diego De Leo, Bill Feigelman, Christine Genest, Eve Griffin, Lisbeth Hybholt, Daisuke Kawashima, Kairi Kõlves, Karolina Krysinska, Edouard Leaune, Antoon Leenaars, Yossi Levi-Belz, Sandra McNally, Pernilla Omerov, Silvia Pelaez, Jennifer Peprah, Vita Postuvan, Inês Areal Rothes, Karen Scavacini, Paolo Scocco, Regina Seibl, Anneli Silvén Hagström, Paulius Skruibis, Prakarn Thomyangkoon, Jemaima Tiatia-Siau, Ruth Van der Hallen, Birgit Wagner, Karl Andriessen
{"title":"为自杀者遗属提供支持的干预措施的有效性感知。","authors":"Laura Hofmann, Adelia Khrisna Putri, Alexandra Pitman, Jason Bantjes, Dolores Angela Castelli Dransart, Hilary Causer, Julie Cerel, Amy Chow, Diego De Leo, Bill Feigelman, Christine Genest, Eve Griffin, Lisbeth Hybholt, Daisuke Kawashima, Kairi Kõlves, Karolina Krysinska, Edouard Leaune, Antoon Leenaars, Yossi Levi-Belz, Sandra McNally, Pernilla Omerov, Silvia Pelaez, Jennifer Peprah, Vita Postuvan, Inês Areal Rothes, Karen Scavacini, Paolo Scocco, Regina Seibl, Anneli Silvén Hagström, Paulius Skruibis, Prakarn Thomyangkoon, Jemaima Tiatia-Siau, Ruth Van der Hallen, Birgit Wagner, Karl Andriessen","doi":"10.1027/0227-5910/a000978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> <i>Background:</i> Suicide bereavement increases the probability of adverse outcomes related to grief, social functioning, mental health, and suicidal behavior. While more support for individuals bereaved by suicide has become available, the evidence regarding its effectiveness is not straightforward. The literature suggests that identifying best-practice components is key in designing effective postvention interventions. <i>Aims:</i> This metareview aims to identify components of suicide bereavement interventions perceived to be effective by suicide-bereaved people. <i>Method:</i> The review adhered to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Systematic searches in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Emcare, EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science identified 11 eligible systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2023. The methodological quality was assessed using the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) (PROSPERO registration CRD42023458300). <i>Results:</i> Our narrative synthesis reported the components perceived to be effective in relation to structure and content of interventions, facilitators, and modality (peer, group, community, online). <i>Limitations:</i> The quality of the included reviews varied considerably, and not all reviews reported on perceived effectiveness of interventions' components. Meta-analysis of findings was not possible due to study heterogeneity. <i>Conclusion:</i> The findings provide crucial information for researchers, service providers, and policymakers to enhance the provision of evidence-based support for people bereaved by suicide.</p>","PeriodicalId":47943,"journal":{"name":"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceived Effectiveness of Components of Interventions to Support People Bereaved By Suicide.\",\"authors\":\"Laura Hofmann, Adelia Khrisna Putri, Alexandra Pitman, Jason Bantjes, Dolores Angela Castelli Dransart, Hilary Causer, Julie Cerel, Amy Chow, Diego De Leo, Bill Feigelman, Christine Genest, Eve Griffin, Lisbeth Hybholt, Daisuke Kawashima, Kairi Kõlves, Karolina Krysinska, Edouard Leaune, Antoon Leenaars, Yossi Levi-Belz, Sandra McNally, Pernilla Omerov, Silvia Pelaez, Jennifer Peprah, Vita Postuvan, Inês Areal Rothes, Karen Scavacini, Paolo Scocco, Regina Seibl, Anneli Silvén Hagström, Paulius Skruibis, Prakarn Thomyangkoon, Jemaima Tiatia-Siau, Ruth Van der Hallen, Birgit Wagner, Karl Andriessen\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/0227-5910/a000978\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b></b> <i>Background:</i> Suicide bereavement increases the probability of adverse outcomes related to grief, social functioning, mental health, and suicidal behavior. While more support for individuals bereaved by suicide has become available, the evidence regarding its effectiveness is not straightforward. The literature suggests that identifying best-practice components is key in designing effective postvention interventions. <i>Aims:</i> This metareview aims to identify components of suicide bereavement interventions perceived to be effective by suicide-bereaved people. <i>Method:</i> The review adhered to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Systematic searches in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Emcare, EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science identified 11 eligible systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2023. The methodological quality was assessed using the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) (PROSPERO registration CRD42023458300). <i>Results:</i> Our narrative synthesis reported the components perceived to be effective in relation to structure and content of interventions, facilitators, and modality (peer, group, community, online). <i>Limitations:</i> The quality of the included reviews varied considerably, and not all reviews reported on perceived effectiveness of interventions' components. Meta-analysis of findings was not possible due to study heterogeneity. <i>Conclusion:</i> The findings provide crucial information for researchers, service providers, and policymakers to enhance the provision of evidence-based support for people bereaved by suicide.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000978\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crisis-The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000978","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:自杀丧亲会增加与悲伤、社会功能、心理健康和自杀行为相关的不良后果的发生概率。虽然为自杀丧亲者提供的支持越来越多,但有关其有效性的证据并不明确。文献表明,确定最佳实践内容是设计有效的后期干预措施的关键。目的:本综述旨在确定自杀丧亲者认为有效的自杀丧亲干预措施的组成部分。方法:综述遵循系统综述和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目。在 Medline、PsycINFO、Embase、Emcare、EBM Reviews、Scopus 和 Web of Science 中进行了系统检索,确定了 11 篇在 2008 年至 2023 年间发表的符合条件的系统综述。方法学质量采用系统性综述评估工具(AMSTAR-2)(PROSPERO 注册号 CRD42023458300)进行评估。结果我们的叙述性综述报告了与干预的结构和内容、促进者和模式(同伴、小组、社区、在线)有关的被认为有效的组成部分。局限性:所纳入的综述质量差异很大,并非所有综述都报告了干预措施各组成部分的有效性。由于研究的异质性,无法对研究结果进行元分析。结论研究结果为研究人员、服务提供者和政策制定者提供了重要信息,有助于为自杀遗属提供更多循证支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perceived Effectiveness of Components of Interventions to Support People Bereaved By Suicide.

Background: Suicide bereavement increases the probability of adverse outcomes related to grief, social functioning, mental health, and suicidal behavior. While more support for individuals bereaved by suicide has become available, the evidence regarding its effectiveness is not straightforward. The literature suggests that identifying best-practice components is key in designing effective postvention interventions. Aims: This metareview aims to identify components of suicide bereavement interventions perceived to be effective by suicide-bereaved people. Method: The review adhered to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Systematic searches in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Emcare, EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science identified 11 eligible systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2023. The methodological quality was assessed using the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) (PROSPERO registration CRD42023458300). Results: Our narrative synthesis reported the components perceived to be effective in relation to structure and content of interventions, facilitators, and modality (peer, group, community, online). Limitations: The quality of the included reviews varied considerably, and not all reviews reported on perceived effectiveness of interventions' components. Meta-analysis of findings was not possible due to study heterogeneity. Conclusion: The findings provide crucial information for researchers, service providers, and policymakers to enhance the provision of evidence-based support for people bereaved by suicide.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: A must for all who need to keep up on the latest findings from both basic research and practical experience in the fields of suicide prevention and crisis intervention! This well-established periodical’s reputation for publishing important articles on suicidology and crisis intervention from around the world is being further enhanced with the move to 6 issues per year (previously 4) in 2010. But over and above its scientific reputation, Crisis also publishes potentially life-saving information for all those involved in crisis intervention and suicide prevention, making it important reading for clinicians, counselors, hotlines, and crisis intervention centers.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信