| Title |
A Systematic Literature Review of Technologies for Suicidal Behavior Prevention
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Systems, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10916-018-0926-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Manuel A. Franco-Martín, Juan Luis Muñoz-Sánchez, Beatriz Sainz-de-Abajo, Gema Castillo-Sánchez, Sofiane Hamrioui, Isabel de la Torre-Díez |
| Abstract |
Suicide is the second cause of death in young people. The use of technologies as tools facilitates the detection of individuals at risk of suicide thus allowing early intervention and efficacy. Suicide can be prevented in many cases. Technology can help people at risk of suicide and their families. It could prevent situations of risk of suicide with the technological evolution that is increasing. This work is a systematic review of research papers published in the last ten years on technology for suicide prevention. In September 2017, the consultation was carried out in the scientific databases PubMed, ScienceDirect, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. A general search was conducted with the terms "prevention" AND "suicide" AND "technology. More specific searches included technologies such as "Web", "mobile", "social networks", and others terms related to technologies. The number of articles found following the methodology proposed was 90, but only 30 are focused on the objective of this work. Most of them were Web technologies (51.61%), mobile solutions (22.58%), social networks (12.90%), machine learning (3.23%) and other technologies (9.68%). According to the results obtained, although there are technological solutions that help the prevention of suicide, much remains to be done in this field. Collaboration among technologists, psychiatrists, patients, and family members is key to advancing the development of new technology-based solutions that can help save lives. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 22% |
| Spain | 1 | 11% |
| Colombia | 1 | 11% |
| Panama | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 225 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 225 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 14% |
| Researcher | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 34 | 15% |
| Unknown | 80 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 37 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 8% |
| Unknown | 96 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2022.
All research outputs
#6,025,592
of 24,717,692 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#205
of 1,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,090
of 337,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#5
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,717,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,081 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.