The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Media Guidelines for the Responsible Reporting of Suicide: A Review of Effectiveness
Abstract
Background: The media have a powerful influence on those at risk of suicide. Evidence linking sensational media reporting with imitative suicidal behavior continues to grow, prompting the widespread development of guidelines for media professionals on the reporting of suicide. While such guidelines have been widely implemented, only a small amount of research has addressed their use and effectiveness. Aims: To conduct a systematic literature review aimed at critically evaluating the evidence concerning the use and effectiveness of media guidelines for reporting on suicide. Methods: All research publications that addressed the effectiveness of media guidelines against a variety of outcome measures were examined. Results: The findings highlight cases in which guideline implementation has successfully mitigated imitative suicides. Significant variability in the effect of guidelines on the quality of suicide reporting was observed between studies, and research suggests journalist awareness, use, and opinion of guidelines is generally low. The critical positive effects of media collaboration and training on reporting are noted. Conclusions: Overall, the findings of this review suggest that the guidelines can change reporting style and prevent imitative suicide, but that approaches centered on consultation, collaboration, media ownership, and training are likely to achieve the greatest success.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Suicide prevention strategies revisited: 10-year systematic review
Zalsman, G., Hawton, K., Wasserman, D., van Heeringen, K., Arensman, E., Sarchiapone, M., Carli, V., Höschl, C., Barzilay, R., Balazs, J., et al. (2016) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30030-x · Cited by 1,765
Adaptation of evidence‐based suicide prevention strategies during and after the COVID‐19 pandemic
Wasserman, D., Iosue, M., Wuestefeld, A., & Carli, V. (2020) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.20801 · Cited by 257
Robinson, J., Hill, N. T. M., Thorn, P., Battersby, R., Teh, Z., Reavley, N. J., Pirkis, J., Lamblin, M., Rice, S., & Skehan, J. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0206584 · Cited by 101
The Definition and Epidemiology of Clusters of Suicidal Behavior: A Systematic Review
Niedzwiedz, C., Haw, C., Hawton, K., & Platt, S. (2014) · Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior · doi:10.1111/sltb.12091 · Cited by 83
Jang, J., Myung, W., Kim, S., Han, M., Yook, V., Kim, E. J., & Jeon, H. J. (2022) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/00048674211025701 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Bohanna, I., & Wang, X.
- Venue
- Crisis
- Publisher
- Hogrefe Publishing Group
- Published
- 2012-07-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 190-198
- ISSN
- 0227-5910 (ISSN-L)
- 2151-2396
- OpenAlex
- W2099659975
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Media Guidelines for the Responsible Reporting of Suicide: A Review of Effectiveness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1027/0227-5910/a000137
- The paper
- Bohanna, I., & Wang, X. (2012). Media Guidelines for the Responsible Reporting of Suicide: A Review of Effectiveness. Crisis. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000137
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.