ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Professional perspectives on roles and structural gaps in interprofessional collaboration for suicide prevention: a qualitative study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond Traditional Psychiatric Care: A Systematic Review of Multidisciplinary Approaches to Mitigating Adolescent Suicide Risk.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Suicidal behavior results from a complex interplay of psychiatric, psychosocial, socioeconomic, and structural factors and requires coordinated approaches across care sectors. Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is widely regarded as essential for bridging gaps in care, yet profession-level descriptions of how IPC is organized and where structural bottlenecks occur in suicide prevention remain limited. This study examined how IPC is structured and experienced from the perspective of mental health professionals involved in selected suicide prevention programs in Switzerland. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 professionals, including psychiatrists, psychologists, psychotherapists, and psychiatric nurses. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, pseudonymized, and analyzed using thematic analysis. A complementary perception-based network visualization depicted reported collaboration patterns. Results: Participants described a layered collaboration structure with a clinical core comprising psychiatrists, psychologists, and psychiatric nurses, who assumed central responsibility for crisis assessment, therapeutic interventions, and follow-up care. General practitioners and social workers acted as bridging actors at transition points, while collaboration with actors such as teachers, police officers, and probation officers was described as more uncertain and episodic. IPC was inconsistently organized: some services relied on designated key workers, whereas others managed collaboration Discussion: From a professional perspective, IPC in Swiss suicide prevention is anchored in specialist mental health services but depends on wider cross-sectoral collaboration. Strengthening IPC requires formal coordination roles, interoperable documentation, and durable structures that embed collaboration across care sectors.
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.