To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), suicide is a major problem. Research on the effectiveness of large-scale suicide prevention interventions is limited.
Aims
To test the effectiveness of an integrated intervention (school-based prevention; reducing access to means of suicide; increased identification and management of suicide risk) in reducing deaths by suicide and suicide attempts; and to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of sub-interventions.
Method
In this pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, 124 villages from Mehsana, India, were randomly assigned to either intervention or control arm. The intervention comprised school-based awareness intervention, community pesticide storage and training of community health workers (CHWs) to recognise, support, refer and follow up people at risk. Intention-to-treat analysis using mixed-effects Poisson regression tested the primary outcome (suicide attempts plus deaths by suicide), and multilevel linear models assessed sub-interventions. The primary outcome was captured through a novel suicide surveillance system.
Results
There was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome between the intervention (54 of 62 consenting villages) and control (62 villages) arms. Separately, the intervention arm showed a 43% reduction in risk of death by suicide at 12 months (suicide rate 30.7 versus 43.6 per 100 000 person-years in intervention versus control arm; incidence rate ratio 0.57, 95% CI: 0.32–1.02, adjusting for baseline and clustering). Most students (≥90%, n = 2330/2560) from 47 schools received the intervention and had lower depression and suicidal ideation than controls at month 3. Nearly all villages (52/54, 96.2%) provided pesticide lockers (n = 8370 households, 88.83% uptake). Compared with controls, CHWs in the intervention arm had significantly higher knowledge, confidence and skills, and identified 108 at-risk individuals.
Conclusions
The intervention increased identification without significantly reducing suicide attempts, but reduced suicide deaths. This trial, involving 116 villages and a multicomponent intervention implemented at scale, advances suicide prevention and complex intervention research, especially in LMICs.
In this chapter, we: (1) detail the problem scope and gatekeeper training as a solution to it, (2) delineate key issues that can impact GT as well as the consequences of ignoring them, (3) explore the value of social network information for GT recruitment, (4) explain the mathematical model of GT and an algorithmic solution approach that can account for gatekeeper, population, and institutional issues, and (5) describe experimental results that compare a novel algorithmic solution for GT recruitment with recruitment approaches that approximate common GT practice.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.