15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Comparison of paediatric emergency department visits for attempted suicide, self-harm, and suicidal ideation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          There is a lack of consensus about the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of children and adolescents. We aimed to compare rates of paediatric emergency department visits for attempted suicide, self-harm, and suicidal ideation during the pandemic with those before the pandemic.

          Methods

          For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO for studies published between Jan 1, 2020, and Dec 19, 2022. Studies published in English with data on paediatric (ie, those aged <19 years) emergency department visits before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Case studies and qualitative analyses were excluded. Changes in attempted suicide, self-harm, suicidal ideation, and other mental-illness indicators (eg, anxiety, depression, and psychosis) were expressed as ratios of the rates of emergency department visits during the pandemic compared with those before the pandemic, and we analysed these with a random-effects meta-analysis. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022341897.

          Findings

          10 360 non-duplicate records were retrieved, which yielded 42 relevant studies (with 130 sample-estimates) representing 11·1 million emergency department visits for all indications of children and adolescents across 18 countries. The mean age of the samples of children and adolescents across studies was 11·7 years (SD 3·1, range 5·5–16·3), and there were on average 57·6% girls and 43·4% boys as a proportion of emergency department visits for any health reasons (ie, physical and mental). Only one study had data related to race or ethnicity. There was good evidence of an increase in emergency department visits for attempted suicide during the pandemic (rate ratio 1·22, 90% CI 1·08–1·37), modest evidence of an increase in emergency department visits for suicidal ideation (1·08, 0·93–1·25), and good evidence for only a slight change in self-harm (0·96, 0·89–1·04). Rates of emergency department visits for other mental-illness indications showed very good evidence of a decline (0·81, 0·74–0·89), and paediatric visits for all health indications showed strong evidence of a reduction (0·68, 0·62–0·75). When rates for attempted suicide and suicidal ideation were combined as a single measure, there was good evidence of an increase in emergency department visits among girls (1·39, 1·04–1·88) and only modest evidence of an increase among boys (1·06, 0·92–1·24). Self-harm among older children (mean age 16·3 years, range 13·0–16·3) showed good evidence of an increase (1·18, 1·00–1·39), but among younger children (mean age 9·0 years, range 5·5–12·0) there was modest evidence of a decrease (0·85, 0·70–1·05).

          Interpretation

          The integration of mental health support within community health and the education system—including promotion, prevention, early intervention, and treatment—is urgently needed to increase the reach of mental health support that can mitigate child and adolescent mental distress. In future pandemics, increased resourcing in some emergency department settings would help to address their expected increase in visits for acute mental distress among children and adolescents.

          Funding

          None.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global Prevalence of Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms in Children and Adolescents During COVID-19 : A Meta-analysis

            Emerging research suggests that the global prevalence of child and adolescent mental illness has increased considerably during COVID-19. However, substantial variability in prevalence rates have been reported across the literature.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations.

              Interpretation of regression coefficients is sensitive to the scale of the inputs. One method often used to place input variables on a common scale is to divide each numeric variable by its standard deviation. Here we propose dividing each numeric variable by two times its standard deviation, so that the generic comparison is with inputs equal to the mean +/-1 standard deviation. The resulting coefficients are then directly comparable for untransformed binary predictors. We have implemented the procedure as a function in R. We illustrate the method with two simple analyses that are typical of applied modeling: a linear regression of data from the National Election Study and a multilevel logistic regression of data on the prevalence of rodents in New York City apartments. We recommend our rescaling as a default option--an improvement upon the usual approach of including variables in whatever way they are coded in the data file--so that the magnitudes of coefficients can be directly compared as a matter of routine statistical practice. (c) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Lancet Psychiatry
                Lancet Psychiatry
                The Lancet. Psychiatry
                Elsevier Ltd.
                2215-0366
                2215-0374
                9 March 2023
                May 2023
                9 March 2023
                : 10
                : 5
                : 342-351
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [b ]Department of Paediatrics, Cummings School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [c ]Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, Calgary, AB, Canada
                [d ]Department of Psychiatry, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
                [e ]Department of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
                [f ]Counselling Psychology, Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
                [g ]School of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
                [h ]Institute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
                [i ]School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Prof Sheri Madigan, Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
                Article
                S2215-0366(23)00036-6
                10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00036-6
                10097509
                36526342
                53fad2ae-fc11-4d0c-8a77-157e11acec2e
                © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Articles

                Comments

                Comment on this article