Citation

Hamilton E, Klimes-Dougan B. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015; 12(3): 2359-2372.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. klimes@umn.edu.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, MDPI: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute)

DOI

10.3390/ijerph120302359

PMID

25711358

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are well-documented gender differences in adolescent suicidal behavior; death by suicide is more common in males, while nonfatal suicide attempts are more common among females. Over the past three decades, researchers have documented the effectiveness of a myriad of suicide prevention initiatives. However, there has been insufficient attention to which types of suicide prevention interventions are effective in changing attitudes and behaviors for young males and females. In this review of the literature, we consider common examples of primarily universal suicide prevention programs from three implementation settings: school-based, community-based, and healthcare-based. Our purpose is to delineate how the potential gender bias in such strategies may translate into youth suicide prevention efforts.

METHODS: Research in which gender was found to moderate program success was retrieved through online databases.

RESULTS: The results that feature programming effects for both males and females are provocative, suggesting that when gender differences are evident, in almost all cases, females seem to be more likely than males to benefit from existing prevention programming.

CONCLUSIONS: We conclude by considering recommendations that may benefit males more directly. Implications for adolescent suicide prevention in particular are discussed. Personalization of suicide intervention is presented as a promising solution to reduce suicide rates.

Language: en