Cited by 50Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesInjury Epidemiology and PreventionPsychiatric care and mental health services

Suicide prevention: What does the evidence show for the effectiveness of safety planning for children and young people? – A systematic scoping review

Open access
Abbott‐Smith, Susan, Ring, Nicola, Dougall, Nadine, Davey, Jill·2023·Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing

Abstract

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Suicide prevention is an international healthcare priority. There is an urgent need to use approaches that are helpful and follow research evidence. Safety planning is now widely used in suicide prevention; however, it was developed for use with adults, and little is known about its effectiveness for children/young people. What the paper adds to existing knowledge?: This systematic scoping review brings together all research evidence since 2008 that reported how effective safety planning is for children/young people. Findings highlight that when healthcare professionals help children/young people who are suicidal, they need to ensure that the safety plan is completed collaboratively with healthcare professionals and children/young people and that it is appropriate for their age and development. There is also need for healthcare professionals to better recognize and respond to the needs of parents/carers who are caring for a child/young person with suicidal ideations/behaviours. What are the implications for practice?: There is some research indicating that safety planning is effective for use with children/young people, but such evidence has primarily been obtained from females and there is need for more evidence from male study populations. Further research on its use is needed for certain groups of children/young people including those who are care experienced, or identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. This review highlighted that healthcare professionals need specific training before they deliver safety planning for children/young people. It was identified that parents/carers have additional needs and should be involved in safety planning. An additional resource specifically for parents/carers should be developed. Introduction: Suicide is a leading cause of death for children and young people and its prevention is a global priority. Many Mental Health Services employ safety planning as a brief intervention. There is some evidence of safety planning effectiveness for adults, but little is known about its effectiveness with young people. Aim: To synthesize research reporting safety planning effectiveness for children/young people with suicidal ideation and identify good practice recommendations. Inclusion criteria: The review relates to safety planning around suicide prevention for children/young people aged less than 18 years, even if it was within a wider intervention. The review was inclusive of all clinical areas (including mental health, primary care, etc), any geographical location or social economic status and inclusivity around the method of delivery. Methods: A systematic scoping review of literature reporting effectiveness data for the use of safety planning with children/young people with suicidal ideation. The systematic scoping review protocol (pre‐registered with Open Science Framework) followed Joanna Briggs Institute conduct guidance and PRISMA‐ScR checklist. Data analysis and presentation: Fifteen studies were reported during 2008–2021. Overall, there is promising, but limited, evidence of effectiveness for safety planning for children/young people but with complete evidence gaps for some demographic sub‐groups. Evidence determined that healthcare professionals should deliver a safety planning intervention that is completed collaboratively, developmentally appropriate, and recognizes parental/carer involvement. Discussion and implications for practice: Further research is needed but current evidence suggests safety planning should be a routine part of care packages for children/young people with suicidal ideation proportionate to their needs. Developing/implementing these plans needs bespoke health professional training and additional support and resources for parents/carers should be developed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jpm.12928

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • A recent scoping review provided a narrative overview of literature published between 2008 and 2020 that reported on the effectiveness of safety planning for children and young people.

    “A recent scoping review18 provided a narrative overview of literature published between 2008 and 2020 that reported on the effectiveness of safety planning for children and young people.”
  • The scoping review indicated that there is some research supporting the use of SPIs for children and young people.

    “It indicated that there is some research supporting the use of SPIs, however, effectiveness was liberally defined as “…having the ability to do more good than harm for the target population in a real-world setting…,”18(p901) and estimates of the magnitude of the effect were not provided.18”
  • Overall fidelity to the SPI model in clinical practice varies across settings and practitioners.

    “Although it is suggested that SPIs include all components,14 the overall fidelity to the SPI model in clinical practice varies across settings and practitioners.15”
  • In the scoping review, effectiveness was liberally defined as having the ability to do more good than harm for the target population in a real-world setting.

    “effectiveness was liberally defined as “…having the ability to do more good than harm for the target population in a real-world setting…,”18(p901)”
  • The scoping review did not provide estimates of the magnitude of the effect.

    “estimates of the magnitude of the effect were not provided.18”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abbott‐Smith, S., Ring, N., Dougall, N., & Davey, J.
Affiliations
  • NHS Lothian (GB)
  • Edinburgh Napier University (GB)
Corresponding author
Abbott‐Smith, Susan
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-04-13
Volume
30
Issue
5
Pages
899-910
ISSN
  • 1351-0126 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2850
OpenAlex
W4365444397
Cited by
50
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 3
FWCI
2.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
safety planning, suicide prevention, children and young people, suicidal ideation, suicide risk assessment, parent and carer involvement, health professions education, brief intervention, LGBTQ youth, gender differences, good practice recommendations, primary care, mental health services, suicide prevention legislation, suicide prevention funding, suicide prevention evaluation
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Mental Health Services, Suicide

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