Skip Navigation


Journal of Public Health Advance Access originally published online on December 3, 2008
Journal of Public Health 2009 31(1):95-97; doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdn101
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/1/95    most recent
fdn101v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Caley, M.
Right arrow Articles by Fowler, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Caley, M.
Right arrow Articles by Fowler, T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008, Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved

Suicide prevention: is more demographic information the answer?



Michael Caley, Specialist Registrar in Public Health1

Tom Fowler, Specialist Trainee in Public Health/Honorary Research Fellow1,2
1 Solihull Care Trust, Mell House, 46 Drury Lane, Solihull B91 3BU, UK
2 Unit of Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health Building, Edgbaston Campus, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT

Address correspondence to Michael Caley, E-mail: michael.caley{at}solihull-ct.nhs.uk


  Abstract

Suicide is an important health issue and its prevention is prioritized in government targets. PCTs in England and Wales are also required to carry out audits of suicide deaths by the Healthcare Commission (HCC). We present findings of a 6-year analysis of suicide deaths between 2002 and 2008 in Birmingham and Solihull, the second largest urban conurbation in the UK. After extensive analysis, no demographic group was shown to have a significantly greater risk of suicide and no geographical area had significantly higher rates than another. Despite the large population examined (c.1.3 million), these findings are likely to be due to the rarity of suicides as an outcome. We discuss the practical implications of these findings for local health organizations charged with reducing suicide rates, the value to local suicide audits and the use of a new suicide audit tool developed for use by PCTs. We conclude that ever increasing collection of information surrounding suicide deaths is unlikely to result in the discovery of local groups amenable to targeted suicide prevention interventions and that the HCC may want to reconsider its performance indicator around suicide audits to allow valuable resources to be used more effectively elsewhere.

Keywords: audit, Healthcare Commission standards, Primary Care Trust, suicide


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.