Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Joen_US
dc.contributor.authorPirkis, Janeen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrysinska, Karolinaen_US
dc.contributor.authorNiner, Saraen_US
dc.contributor.authorF. Jorm, Anthonyen_US
dc.contributor.authorDudley, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchindeler, Emilyen_US
dc.contributor.authorDe Leo, Diegoen_US
dc.contributor.authorHarrigan, Susyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T11:38:51Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T11:38:51Z
dc.date.issued2008en_US
dc.date.modified2010-09-20T06:56:05Z
dc.identifier.issn02275910en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1027/0227-5910.29.4.180en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/23360
dc.description.abstractThis project sought to inform priority setting in Australian suicide prevention research, by empirically examining existing priorities and by seeking stakeholders' views on where future priorities might lie. Existing priorities were examined via reviews of Australian literature published and grants funded during the life of the National Suicide Prevention Strategy (1999-2006). Stakeholders' views of future priorities were elicited via a questionnaire administered to 11 groups comprising 231 individuals with an interest in suicide prevention. The study identified 263 journal articles and 36 grants. The journal articles most commonly reported on studies of descriptive epidemiology, while the grants tended to fund intervention studies. Both gave roughly equal weight to completed and attempted suicide, and gave little emphasis to studies of suicide methods. Young people were the most frequently-researched target group, with people with mental health problems and people who had attempted suicide or deliberately self-harmed also receiving attention. Stakeholders indicated that emphasis should be given to intervention studies, and that completed suicide and attempted suicide are both important. In terms of suicide method, they felt the focus should be on poisoning by drugs and hanging. They had mixed views about the target groups that should be afforded priority, although young people and people with mental health problems were frequently ranked highly. This paper presents a picture of the current focus with regard to suicide prevention research, identifying some areas where there are clear gaps and others where relatively greater efforts have been made. By combining this information with stakeholders' views of where future priorities should lie, the paper provides some guidance as to the shape a future suicide prevention research agenda for Australia should take. A strategic approach to suicide prevention research will help fill internationally-identified gaps in knowledge about what works and what doesn't work in suicide prevention.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherHogrefe & Huberen_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited States of Americaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom180en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto190en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue4en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalCrisisen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume29en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_AU
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode321204en_US
dc.titleResearch priorities in suicide prevention in Australia.en_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.date.issued2008
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record