| Title |
Causes of suicidal behaviors in men who have sex with men in China: a national questionnaire survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-1436-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hongquan Chen, Yang Li, Lixin Wang, Beichuan Zhang |
| Abstract |
Men who have sex with men (MSM) have become a high-risk group of HIV infection in China. To date, little is known regarding the psychological characteristics in Chinese MSM, especially the prevalence of suicidal ideation and attempts. A questionnaire survey was conducted on 2,250 MSM recruited from gay bars in 9 large cities in mainland China. Data on the prevalence of suicidal ideation and attempts as well as the underlying causes in the respondents were analyzed. A total of 1530 MSM responded to the question regarding previous suicidal ideation and attempts. Of these respondents, 26.01% had ever considered suicide and 12.55% actually attempted suicide at least once. Romantic gay relationship breakup was the number one cause of suicide behaviors, followed by self-objection to homosexuality, difficulties in finding gay partners or in getting used to heterosexual marriage life, sudden emotional hurts from unexpected events, illegal status of gay marriage in China and disclosure of homosexuality. The survey study has led to a better understanding of the factors contributing to suicide behaviors of MSM in China, which may have significant implications in developing preventive strategies against suicide behaviors in this unique group of individuals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 61 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 22 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 February 2015.
All research outputs
#15,321,186
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,327
of 14,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,944
of 352,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#151
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 352,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.