SynthesisArchives of suicide research : official journal of the International Academy for Suicide Research
Are we Using the Right Evidence to Inform Suicide Prevention in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? An Umbrella Review.
Synthesis in Archives of suicide research : official journal of the International Academy for Suicide Research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07574658 (Brief Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Suicide Prevention in a Brazilian Sample), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Brief Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Suicide Prevention in a Brazilian Sample: a Study Protocol of a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Adverse childhood experiences and suicidality in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2025Pooled it
- Links between climate change and suicidal behavior risks.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Uplifting ethnic minority voices in the Western Pacific region: a priority for regional suicide research.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Can #chatsafe support parents and carers beyond Australia? A qualitative study.BMC public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSuicide disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries and evidence regarding prevention approaches developed in high income countries may not be applicable in these settings. We conducted an umbrella review to assess whether the conclusions of suicide prevention systematic reviews accurately reflect the studies contained within those reviews in terms of setting generalizability.
methodsWe conducted database searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, PsychExtra, OVID global health, and LILACS/BECS. We included systematic reviews with the outcome of suicide, including bereavement studies where suicide death was also the exposure.
resultsOut of the 147 reviews assessed, we found that over 80% of systematic reviews on suicide deaths do not provide an accurate summary of review findings with relation to geographic relevance and ultimately generalizability.
conclusionSystematic reviews are often the resource used by practitioners and policymakers to guide services. Misleading reviews can detrimentally impact suicide prevention efforts in LMICs. We call for systematic reviewers to be responsible when generalizing the findings of their reviews particularly in the abstracts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.