Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness

OBJECTIVE:We have assessed the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to prevent self-harm repetition and suicide. METHODS:Trials were identified in two systematic reviews of RCTs of psychosocial treatments following a recent (within six months) episode of sel...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Witt, K, Townsend, E, Arensman, E, Gunnell, D, Hazell, P, Sailsbury, T, Van Heeringen, K, Hawton, K
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: Routledge 2019
_version_ 1826294297667829760
author Witt, K
Townsend, E
Arensman, E
Gunnell, D
Hazell, P
Sailsbury, T
Van Heeringen, K
Hawton, K
author_facet Witt, K
Townsend, E
Arensman, E
Gunnell, D
Hazell, P
Sailsbury, T
Van Heeringen, K
Hawton, K
author_sort Witt, K
collection OXFORD
description OBJECTIVE:We have assessed the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to prevent self-harm repetition and suicide. METHODS:Trials were identified in two systematic reviews of RCTs of psychosocial treatments following a recent (within six months) episode of self-harm indexed in any of five electronic databases (CCDANCTR-Studies and References, CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO) between 1 January, 1998 and 29 April, 2015. RESULTS:A total of 66 trials were included, 55 in adults and 11 in children and adolescents. While evidence for efficacy of some approaches has grown, there were few trials from low-to-middle income countries, little information on interventions for males, information on the control condition was often limited, data on suicides were often not reported, and, while trials have increased in size in recent years, most have included too few participants to detect clinically significant results. CONCLUSIONS:There are major limitations in many trials of interventions for individuals who self-harm. Improved methodology, especially with regard to study size, provision of details of control therapy, and evaluation of key outcomes, would enhance the evidence base for clinicians and service users.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T03:43:28Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:bea8f3b2-f1ff-49ad-bec4-96b7aaf44e0b
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T03:43:28Z
publishDate 2019
publisher Routledge
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:bea8f3b2-f1ff-49ad-bec4-96b7aaf44e0b2022-03-27T05:41:27ZPsychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectivenessJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:bea8f3b2-f1ff-49ad-bec4-96b7aaf44e0bEnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordRoutledge2019Witt, KTownsend, EArensman, EGunnell, DHazell, PSailsbury, TVan Heeringen, KHawton, KOBJECTIVE:We have assessed the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to prevent self-harm repetition and suicide. METHODS:Trials were identified in two systematic reviews of RCTs of psychosocial treatments following a recent (within six months) episode of self-harm indexed in any of five electronic databases (CCDANCTR-Studies and References, CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO) between 1 January, 1998 and 29 April, 2015. RESULTS:A total of 66 trials were included, 55 in adults and 11 in children and adolescents. While evidence for efficacy of some approaches has grown, there were few trials from low-to-middle income countries, little information on interventions for males, information on the control condition was often limited, data on suicides were often not reported, and, while trials have increased in size in recent years, most have included too few participants to detect clinically significant results. CONCLUSIONS:There are major limitations in many trials of interventions for individuals who self-harm. Improved methodology, especially with regard to study size, provision of details of control therapy, and evaluation of key outcomes, would enhance the evidence base for clinicians and service users.
spellingShingle Witt, K
Townsend, E
Arensman, E
Gunnell, D
Hazell, P
Sailsbury, T
Van Heeringen, K
Hawton, K
Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
title Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
title_full Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
title_fullStr Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
title_full_unstemmed Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
title_short Psychosocial interventions for people who self-harm: methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
title_sort psychosocial interventions for people who self harm methodological issues involved in trials to evaluate effectiveness
work_keys_str_mv AT wittk psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT townsende psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT arensmane psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT gunnelld psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT hazellp psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT sailsburyt psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT vanheeringenk psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness
AT hawtonk psychosocialinterventionsforpeoplewhoselfharmmethodologicalissuesinvolvedintrialstoevaluateeffectiveness