Cited by 28Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesChild Welfare and AdoptionHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Vulnerable yet forgotten? A systematic review identifying the lack of evidence for effective suicide interventions for young people in contact with child protection systems.

Russell, Douglas H., Trew, Sebastian, Higgins, Daryl J.·2021·American Journal of Orthopsychiatry

Abstract

Children and young people in out-of-home care are at a higher risk of suicide than young people not involved with child protection systems. Despite this, there is a lack of evidence of effective suicide prevention interventions for this vulnerable population. We reviewed the types of suicide prevention interventions that have been used and evaluated with children and young people and staff and carers in out-of-home care/child protection systems. We conducted a systematic review of existing literature using PRISMA guidelines. Only five studies met the inclusion criteria. Two evaluated youth-focused interventions: emotional intelligence therapy; and multidimensional treatment foster care, while three evaluated adult-focused "gatekeeper training." Youth-focused interventions led to reductions in suicidal thoughts (suicidal ideation), and adult-focused interventions led to increased knowledge, skills, and behaviors such as referring youth to supports. Only one study, one of the youth-focused ones, evaluated the impact of the intervention in terms of suicide attempts but found no reduction. Large numbers of children enter into care with a high risk of suicide. With the considerable overlap between the trauma characteristics and mental health needs of young people in out-of-home care and suicide risk factors in the general population of young people, we recommend developing (and evaluating) new or adapted existing suicide prevention interventions designed specifically for the out-of-home care context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/ort0000555

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Russell, D. H., Trew, S., & Higgins, D. J.
Venue
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
Published
2021
Volume
91
Issue
5
Pages
647-659
ISSN
  • 0002-9432 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0025
OpenAlex
W3190845152
Cited by
27
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2
FWCI
3.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Suicide Prevention Australia
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Keywords
youth suicide prevention, out-of-home care, child protection system, suicidal ideation, gatekeeper training, Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care, trauma
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Family, Humans, Mental Health, Suicide, Attempted, Caregivers, 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