Suicide prevention: What does the evidence show for the effectiveness of safety planning for children and young people? – A systematic scoping review
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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.”
From Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
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”
From Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents (2025) · cites this paper as [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”
From Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents (2025) · cites this paper as [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)”
From Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
The scoping review did not provide estimates of the magnitude of the effect.
“estimates of the magnitude of the effect were not provided.18”
From Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
Potential moderators of treatment effect, including methodological factors, treatment-related factors, and patient-related factors, could not be examined.
“Although heterogeneity of effects was noted, potential moderators of treatment effect, including methodological factors (eg, study design),16 treatment-related factors (eg, clinician training),15,36 and patient-related factors (eg, age, gender) could not be examined.”
From Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents (2025) · cites this paper as [15]
Cites
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., et al. (2018) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m18-0850 · Cited by 43,565 · see citing works
Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews
Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020) · JBI Evidence Synthesis · doi:10.11124/jbies-20-00167 · Cited by 7,751 · see citing works
(2020) · JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis · doi:10.46658/jbimes-20-12 · Cited by 2,545 · see citing works
Stanley, B., Brown, G., Brent, D. A., Wells, K., Poling, K., Curry, J., Kennard, B. D., Wagner, A., Cwik, M. F., Klomek, A. B., et al. (2009) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e3181b5dbfe · Cited by 423 · see citing works
Asarnow, J. R., Baraff, L. J., Berk, M., Grob, C. S., Devich-Navarro, M., Suddath, R., Piacentini, J. C., Rotheram-Borus, M. J., Cohen, D., & Tang, L. (2011) · Psychiatric Services · doi:10.1176/ps.62.11.pss6211_1303 · Cited by 251 · see citing works
What Works in Youth Suicide Prevention? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Robinson, J., Bailey, E., Witt, K., Stefanac, N., Milner, A., Currier, D., Pirkis, J., Condron, P., & Hetrick, S. (2018) · EClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2018.10.004 · Cited by 242 · see citing works
Cognitive-behavioral family treatment for suicide attempt prevention: A randomized controlled trial
Asarnow, J. R., Hughes, J. L., Babeva, K. N., & Sugar, C. A. (2017) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2017.03.015 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Preventing Suicide in Young People: Systematic Review
Robinson, J., Hetrick, S. E., & Martin, C. (2011) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.3109/00048674.2010.511147 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Czyz, E. K., King, C. A., & Biermann, B. J. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · doi:10.1080/15374416.2018.1496442 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Recent advances in understanding and managing self-harm in adolescents
Clarke, S., Allerhand, L. A., & Berk, M. S. (2019) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.19868.1 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Hughes, J. L., & Asarnow, J. R. (2013) · Clinical Pediatric Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.cpem.2013.01.002 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Wolff, J. C., Frazier, E. A., Weatherall, S. L., Thompson, A. D., Liu, R. T., & Hunt, J. I. (2018) · Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1089/cap.2017.0135 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Safety Planning Interventions for Suicide Prevention in Children and Adolescents
Albaum, C., Irwin, S. H., Muha, J., Schumacher, A., Clarissa, S., Finkelstein, Y., Bridge, J. A., & Korczak, D. J. (2025) · JAMA Pediatrics · doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.1012 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Kourgiantakis, T., Cooper, D., Cooper, D., Craig, S., Lee, E., Jones, J., Lau, C. K. Y., Tousignant, R.-N., Singer, J. B., Johnstone, M., et al. (2025) · International Journal of Mental Health Systems · doi:10.1186/s13033-025-00680-y · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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