↓ Skip to main content

Psychiatrists’ experiences of suicide assessment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychiatrists’ experiences of suicide assessment
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12888-016-1147-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margda Waern, Niclas Kaiser, Ellinor Salander Renberg

Abstract

Clinical guidelines for suicide prevention often stress the identification of risk and protective factors as well as the evaluation of suicidal intent. However, we know very little about what psychiatrists actually do when they make these assessments. The aim was to investigate psychiatrists' own accounts of suicide assessment consultations, with a focus on their behaviors, attitudes and emotions. Semi-structured in depth interviews were carried out with a purposive selection of 15 psychiatrists. Thematic analysis revealed three main themes: understanding the patient in a precarious situation, understanding one's own reactions, and understanding how the doctor-patient relationship impacted on risk assessment and management decisions. Emotional contact and credibility issues were common subthemes that arose when the respondents talked about trying to understand the patient. The psychiatrists stressed the semi-intuitive nature of their assessments. Problems related to the use of risk factor assessments and rating scales were apparent. Assessment consultations could evoke physical and emotional symptoms of anxiety, and concerns about responsibility could lead to repressive management decisions. In situations of mutual trust, however, the assessment consultation could kick-start a therapeutic process. This study highlights psychiatrists' experiences in clinical suicide assessment situations. Findings have implications for professional development as well as for service delivery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 19%
Student > Master 8 11%
Other 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 23 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 24 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#2,668,913
of 25,755,403 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,038
of 5,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,005
of 422,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#21
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,755,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,510 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.