ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2025
Self-harm and suicide prevention in humanitarian and fragile contexts: A systematic scoping review.
Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suicide remains one of the leading causes of death globally, with growing evidence that humanitarian emergencies and fragile states, most of which unfold in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), are associated with elevated risk of suicide. However, the few suicide-targeted interventions for use in humanitarian contexts remain both sparse and fragmented. This scoping review aims to identify and synthesise evidence from suicide and self-harm prevention interventions implemented in all types of humanitarian settings, globally, that have been evaluated for their effectiveness in improving suicide and self-harm-related outcomes. We systematically searched eight electronic databases, including two grey literature databases, and relevant organisational websites for records published through November 2024 and in any language. Screening was done using the Covidence platform, with each record independently screened by two reviewers. Among other preselected inclusion criteria, studies must have conducted a quantitative evaluation of the effectiveness of an intervention on improving suicide and self-harm-related outcomes during a humanitarian crisis to be included for data extraction. Data extraction and quality assessment were both conducted by two authors. In all, 6,209 records were screened at the title and abstract phase; 104 were included for full text screening; and 23 studies were included for data extraction. Most studies were conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic (COVID-19), and in high-income countries. Evaluated interventions encompassed various approaches, including psychotherapeutic, practical, and pharmacological assistance, often employing multiple components. The majority targeted the general population, were delivered via remote modalities and relied on mental health specialists for their administration. Overall, 15 (65.2%) interventions were associated with statistically significant positive effects on suicide and or self-harm-related outcomes. Promising approaches include cognitive behavioural therapy-based text services, skills-building programmes, and strategies that foster supportive environments for high-risk individuals. These findings highlight both promising approaches and critical gaps in suicide prevention efforts in humanitarian settings. The limited evidence base - particularly in LMICs and with particularly at-risk populations - alongside the increasing frequency of humanitarian crises, underscores the urgent need for future implementation and associated research of suicide and self-harm prevention initiatives within humanitarian contexts.
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.