↓ Skip to main content

Ethical challenges faced by healthcare professionals who care for suicidal patients: a scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in Monash Bioethics Review, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Ethical challenges faced by healthcare professionals who care for suicidal patients: a scoping review
Published in
Monash Bioethics Review, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40592-018-0076-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victoria Saigle, Eric Racine

Abstract

For each one of the approximately 800,000 people who die from suicide every year, an additional twenty people attempt suicide. Many of these attempts result in hospitalization or in contact with other healthcare services. However, many personal, educational, and institutional barriers make it difficult for healthcare professionals to care for suicidal individuals. We reviewed literature that discusses suicidal patients in healthcare settings in order to highlight common ethical issues and to identify knowledge gaps. A sample was generated via PubMed using keywords "[(ethics OR *ethic*) AND suicid*] AND [English (Language) OR French (Language)]" (final N = 52), ethics content was extracted according to scoping review methodology, and categorized thematically. We identified three main areas posing ethical challenges for health professionals caring for suicidal individuals and their families. These were: (1) making clinical decisions for patients in acute care or when presented with specific circumstances; (2) issues arising from therapeutic relationships in chronic care, and (3) organizational factors. There is considerable uncertainty about how to resolve ethical issues when caring for someone who is suicidal. The stigma associated with suicide and mental illness, problems associated with risk-benefit assessments, and the fear of being held liable for malpractice should a patient die by suicide were overarching themes present across these three categories. Caring for suicidal patients is clinically and ethically challenging. The current literature highlights the complexity and range of decisions that need to be made. More attention should be paid to the difficulties faced by healthcare professionals and the development of solutions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Unspecified 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 15 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Unspecified 3 6%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 17 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 March 2019.
All research outputs
#12,760,614
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Monash Bioethics Review
#64
of 148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,032
of 327,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Monash Bioethics Review
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 327,032 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.