Cited by 133Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbuseMental Health Treatment and Access

Geographical and temporal variations in the prevalence of mental disorders in suicide: systematic review and meta-analysis

Cho, Seo-Eun, Na, Kyoung-Sae, Cho, Seong-Jin, Im, Jeong-Soo, Kang, Seung-Gul·2016·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background In contrast to the previous studies reporting that most suicides occur among people with mental disorders, recent studies have reported various rates of mental disorders in suicide in different geographical regions. We aimed to comprehensively investigate the factors influencing the variation in the prevalence of mental disorders reported among suicide victims.Method The authors searched Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to identify psychological autopsy studies reporting the prevalence of any mental disorders among suicide victims. A meta-regression analysis was conducted to identify the potential effects of geographical regions, the year of publication, measurements of personality disorder, measurements of comorbidity, and the ratio of females on the prevalence of mental disorders in addition to examining the heterogeneity across studies.Results From 4475 potentially relevant studies, 48 studies met eligibility criteria, with 6626 suicide victims. The studies from East Asia had a significantly lower mean prevalence (69.6% [95% CI=56.8 to 80.0]) than those in North America (88.2% [95% CI=79.7-93.5]) and South Asia (90.4% [95% CI=71.8-97.2]). The prevalence of any mental disorder decreased according to the year of publication (coefficients=-0.0715, p<0.001).Limitations Substantial heterogeneities were identified within all subgroup analyses.Conclusions The prevalence of mental disorders among suicide cases seemed relatively low in the East Asia region, and recently published studies tended to report a lower prevalence of mental disorders. The link between the risk factors and suicide in the absence of a mental disorder should be examined in different geographical and sociocultural contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2015.11.008

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous reviews of psychological autopsy studies have been limited in scope (primarily focusing on mental disorders) and samples (including selected populations such as psychiatric patients).

    “To our knowledge, five previous reviews have quantitatively summarised findings from psychological autopsy studies,5–9 but these have been limited in scope (primarily focusing on mental disorders) and samples (including selected populations such as psychiatric patients).”
  • The inclusion of studies with controls who died by causes other than suicide is consistent with previous reviews of psychological autopsy studies.

    “The inclusion of studies with controls who died by causes other than suicide is consistent with previous reviews of psychological autopsy studies.5–9”
  • Bibliographical searches were complemented by manual searches of reference lists of included studies and previous systematic reviews.

    “Bibliographical searches were complemented by manual searches of reference lists of included studies and previous systematic reviews.5–9”
  • Previous reviews of psychological autopsy studies have not captured the breadth of individual-level risk factors for suicide and mainly focused on the contribution of mental disorders to suicide risk.

    “First, previous reviews of psychological autopsy studies5–9 have not captured the breadth of individual-level risk factors for suicide, and instead mainly focused on the contribution of mental disorders to suicide risk.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 91 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cho, S.-E., Na, K.-S., Cho, S.-J., Im, J.-S., & Kang, S.-G.
Affiliations
Gachon University Gil Medical Center (KR)
Corresponding author
Na, Kyoung-Sae
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
190
Pages
704-713
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2189883719
Cited by
133
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
suicide, mental illness, prevalence, psychological autopsy, regional variation, temporal trends, personality disorders, comorbidities, sex ratio, East Asia, North America, South Asia
MeSH terms
Asia, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, North America, Personality Disorders, Psychotic Disorders, Risk Factors, Suicide, Global Health, Comorbidity, Prevalence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review