Back

Development of a Suicide Prevention Life Gatekeeper Training Program in China: A Delphi study

Cai, C.; Yin, C.; Tong, Y.; Qu, D.; Ding, Y.; Ren, D.; Chen, P.; Yin, Y.; An, J.; Chen, R.

2023-01-04 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2023.01.01.22284096 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionYouth suicide has been a pressing public mental health concern in China, yet there is a lack of localised gatekeeper intervention programs developed for Chinese schools. Life Gatekeeper was the first systematically developed gatekeeper program which aimed to equip teachers and parents with knowledge, skills, and ability to identify and intervene students at high risk of suicide. This study aimed to achieve expert consensus on the content of this program. MethodsThe Delphi method was used to elicit consensus on statements essential to include in the training program. In the form of scoring existing statements and responding to open-ended questions, experts have the opportunity to evaluate the content, delivery form, feasibility, and overall feeling of the initial training program. Two Delphi rounds were conducted among Chinese panel members with diversified professional backgrounds in suicide research and practice. Statements were accepted for inclusion in the adjusted training program if they were endorsed by at least 80% of the panel. ResultsConsensus was achieved on 201 statements out of 207 statements for inclusion in the adapted guidelines for the gatekeeper programme, with 151 from the original questionnaire, and 50 generated from the comments of the panel members. These endorsed statements were used to develop the Life Gatekeeper training program. ConclusionThis Delphi study provided an evidence base in developing of the first gatekeeper training program in China. We hope that the current study could pave the way for more evidence based suicide prevention programs in China. Further study is warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of the Life Gatekeeper training program.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.