Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNiner, Saraen_US
dc.contributor.authorPirkis, Janeen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrysinska, Karolinaen_US
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Joen_US
dc.contributor.authorDudley, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchindeler, Emilyen_US
dc.contributor.authorDe Leo, Diegoen_US
dc.contributor.authorWarr, Deborahen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-11T12:30:33Z
dc.date.available2017-05-11T12:30:33Z
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.issn14467984en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/28009
dc.description.abstractThe current study sought to inform priority setting in Australian suicide prevention research, by seeking stakeholders' views on where future priorities might lie. Three group interviews were conducted with a total of 28 participants. Group interview participants stressed that priority should be given to evaluating the efficacy of specific interventions and examining the response of the health and community service systems. They felt that the epidemiological profile of suicidal individuals had been explored, at least with respect to rates and individual-level risk factors, and that the above evaluative activities should focus on groups identified as having particularly high levels of risk. Most saw limited value in continuing to explore individual-level risk factors ad infinitum, and felt that the time had come to move on to considering wider societal influences on suicide and individual-level protective factors. Many felt that evaluation efforts should employ mixed methods, should be multidisciplinary and should be relevant to the Australian context. They also argued that there was scope for increasing the utility of research findings by communicating them in a manner that would enable them to be utilised by policy-makers, planners and practitioners. Several called for a more cohesive framework for suicide prevention that could guide suicide prevention research. The current study provides some guidance with respect to the direction Australia's suicide prevention research agenda should take. A priority-driven approach to suicide prevention research will ensure that the research endeavour provides the most useful information for those whose day-to-day work involves trying to prevent suicide.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent77385 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherAuseiNeten_US
dc.publisher.placeAdelaide, Australiaen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=272377755466388;res=IELHEAen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto9en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalAustralian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health (AeJAMH)en_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume8en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPsychology and Cognitive Sciences not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode179999en_US
dc.titleResearch priorities in suicide prevention: A qualitative study of stakeholders’ viewsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.description.notepublicPage numbers are not for citation purposes.en_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2009 Auseinet. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Use hypertext link to access the publisher's website.en_US
gro.date.issued2015-06-12T05:03:45Z
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in 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