CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 572Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesMental Health Treatment and AccessHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviours among college students: a meta-analysis

Open access
Mortier, P., Cuijpers, P., Kiekens, G., Auerbach, R. P., Demyttenaere, K., Green, J. G., Kessler, R. C., Nock, M. K., Bruffaerts, R.·2018·Psychological Medicine
DOI 10.1017/s0033291717002215
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Adolescence and young adulthood carry risk for suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STB). An increasing subpopulation of young people consists of college students. STB prevalence estimates among college students vary widely, precluding a validated point of reference. In addition, little is known on predictors for between-study heterogeneity in STB prevalence. Methods: A systematic literature search identified 36 college student samples that were assessed for STB outcomes, representing a total of 634 662 students [median sample size = 2082 (IQR 353–5200); median response rate = 74% (IQR 37–89%)]. We used random-effects meta-analyses to obtain pooled STB prevalence estimates, and multivariate meta-regression models to identify predictors of between-study heterogeneity. Results: Pooled prevalence estimates of lifetime suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts were 22.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.5–25.3%], 6.1% (95% CI 4.8–7.7%), and 3.2% (95% CI 2.2–4.5%), respectively. For 12-month prevalence, this was 10.6% (95% CI 9.1–12.3%), 3.0% (95% CI 2.1–4.0%), and 1.2% (95% CI 0.8–1.6%), respectively. Measures of heterogeneity were high for all outcomes ( I 2 = 93.2–99.9%), indicating substantial between-study heterogeneity not due to sampling error. Pooled estimates were generally higher for females, as compared with males (risk ratios in the range 1.12–1.67). Higher STB estimates were also found in samples with lower response rates, when using broad definitions of suicidality, and in samples from Asia. Conclusions: Based on the currently available evidence, STB seem to be common among college students. Future studies should: (1) incorporate refusal conversion strategies to obtain adequate response rates, and (2) use more fine-grained measures to assess suicidal ideation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291717002215

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 85 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. 2016, Suicide data
  2. 2013, Education Indicators in Focus - What are the Social Benefits of Education?
  3. 2012, Education at a Glance 2012: OECD Indicators
  4. Groves, 2004a, Survey Methodology
  5. 2000, American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment, 2000–2015
  6. Crespo, 2013, Compulsory Schooling, Education and Mental Health: New Evidence from Sharelife (CEMFI Working Paper no. 1304)
  7. Cuijpers, 2016, Meta-analyses in Mental Health Research – A Practical Guide

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 571

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Mortier, P., Cuijpers, P., Kiekens, G., Auerbach, R. P., Demyttenaere, K., Green, J. G., Kessler, R. C., Nock, M. K., & Bruffaerts, R.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Mortier, P.
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2017-08-14
Volume
48
Issue
4
Pages
554-565
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
DOI
10.1017/s0033291717002215
OpenAlex
W2746711211
Cited by
572
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 76 · 2025: 100 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 71 · 2022: 68 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 1
FWCI
5.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • University of Michigan
  • Auburn University
  • University of Texas at Austin
  • University of British Columbia
  • University of Maryland School of Public Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Keywords
suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, university students, prevalence, suicide attempts, suicide planning, early adulthood, gender differences, response rate
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Humans, Students, Suicide, Attempted, Universities, Prevalence, Young Adult, Suicidal Ideation

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