Cited by 336Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesMental Health via WritingImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Social media and suicide prevention: a systematic review

Robinson, Jo, Cox, Georgina, Bailey, Eleanor, Hetrick, Sarah, Rodrigues, Maria, Fisher, Steve, Herrman, Helen·2016·Early Intervention in Psychiatry

Abstract

AIM: Social media platforms are commonly used for the expression of suicidal thoughts and feelings, particularly by young people. Despite this, little is known about the ways in which social media can be used for suicide prevention. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to identify current evidence pertaining to the ways in which social media are currently used as a tool for suicide prevention. METHODS: Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, CINHAL and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles published between 1991 and April 2014. English language articles with a focus on suicide-related behaviour and social media were included. No exclusion was placed on study design. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included; 4 described the development of social media sites designed for suicide prevention, 6 examined the potential of social media in terms of its ability to reach or identify people at risk of suicide, 15 examined the ways in which people used social media for suicide prevention-related purposes, and 5 examined the experiences of people who had used social media sites for suicide prevention purposes. No intervention studies were identified. CONCLUSION: Social media platforms can reach large numbers of otherwise hard-to-engage individuals, may allow others to intervene following an expression of suicidal ideation online, and provide an anonymous, accessible and non-judgmental forum for sharing experiences. Challenges include difficulties controlling user behaviour and accurately assessing risk, issues relating to privacy and confidentiality and the possibility of contagion. Social media appears to hold significant potential for suicide prevention; however, additional research into its safety and efficacy is required.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/eip.12229

Cites

59 of 59 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robinson, J., Cox, G., Bailey, E., Hetrick, S., Rodrigues, M., Fisher, S., & Herrman, H.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Community Works Associates Pty Ltd Docklands Victoria Australia
Corresponding author
Robinson, Jo
Venue
Early Intervention in Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02-19
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
103-121
ISSN
  • 1751-7885 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-7893
OpenAlex
W1922396948
Cited by
336
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Early Intervention in Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre
  • Orygen Youth Health Research Centre
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
social media, suicide prevention, suicidal ideation, youth, suicide risk identification, suicide contagion, privacy and confidentiality
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Humans, Social Media

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