↓ Skip to main content

The role of schools in children and young people’s self-harm and suicide: systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative research

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 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 (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
238 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The role of schools in children and young people’s self-harm and suicide: systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative research
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3065-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rhiannon Evans, Chloe Hurrell

Abstract

Evidence reports that schools influence children and young people's health behaviours across a range of outcomes. However there remains limited understanding of the mechanisms through which institutional features may structure self-harm and suicide. This paper reports on a systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative research exploring how schools influence self-harm and suicide in students. Systematic searches were conducted of nineteen databases from inception to June 2015. English language, primary research studies, utilising any qualitative research design to report on the influence of primary or secondary educational settings (or international equivalents) on children and young people's self-harm and suicide were included. Two reviewers independently appraised studies against the inclusion criteria, assessed quality, and abstracted data. Data synthesis was conducted in adherence with Noblit and Hare's meta-ethnographic approach. Of 6744 unique articles identified, six articles reporting on five studies were included in the meta-ethnography. Five meta-themes emerged from the studies. First, self-harm is often rendered invisible within educational settings, meaning it is not prioritised within the curriculum despite students' expressed need. Second, where self-harm transgresses institutional rules it may be treated as 'bad behaviour', meaning adequate support is denied. Third, schools' informal management strategy of escalating incidents of self-harm to external 'experts' serves to contribute to non-help seeking behaviour amongst students who desire confidential support from teachers. Fourth, anxiety and stress associated with school performance may escalate self-harm and suicide. Fifth, bullying within the school context can contribute to self-harm, whilst some young people may engage in these practices as initiation into a social group. Schools may influence children and young people's self-harm, although evidence of their impact on suicide remains limited. Prevention and intervention needs to acknowledge and accommodate these institutional-level factors. Studies included in this review are limited by their lack of conceptual richness, restricting the process of interpretative synthesis. Further qualitative research should focus on the continued development of theoretical and empirical insight into the relationship between institutional features and students' self-harm and suicide.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 237 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 50 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 14%
Student > Bachelor 26 11%
Researcher 26 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 10%
Other 37 16%
Unknown 43 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 77 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 14%
Social Sciences 29 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 11%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 21 9%
Unknown 49 21%

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 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,577,686
of 17,071,340 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,798
of 11,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,201
of 270,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,071,340 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 270,949 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them