↓ Skip to main content

Multicomponent Intervention for Patients Admitted to an Emergency Unit for Suicide Attempt: An Exploratory Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Multicomponent Intervention for Patients Admitted to an Emergency Unit for Suicide Attempt: An Exploratory Study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00188
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastien Brovelli, Yves Dorogi, Adam-Scott Feiner, Philippe Golay, Friedrich Stiefel, Charles Bonsack, Laurent Michaud

Abstract

Suicide is a major cause of premature deaths worldwide and belongs to the top priority public health issues. While suicide attempt is the most important risk factor for completed suicide, intervention for suicide attempters (SA) have produced mixed results. Since an important proportion of SA request medical care, emergency units (EU) are an opportune setting to implement such interventions. This exploratory study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent intervention for SA admitted to an EU. The intervention consisted of coordination by a case manager of a joint crisis plan (JCP), an early meeting with relatives and the existing care network, as well as phone contacts during 3 months after suicide attempt. Among 107 SA admitted to the emergency unit during the study period, 51 could not be included for logistical reason, 22 were excluded, and intervention was offered to 34. Of these, 15 refused the intervention, which was thus piloted with 19 SA. First-time attempters most frequently declined the intervention. Feasibility and acceptability of phone contacts and case manager were good, while JCPs and meetings were difficult to implement and perceived as less acceptable. Refusal pattern questions the global acceptability and is discussed: JCPs and meetings will have to be modified in order to improve their feasibility and acceptability, especially among first-time attempters.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Other 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 16 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 18%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Unknown 17 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,364,802
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#4,740
of 10,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,798
of 320,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#49
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,139 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 320,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.