Search

Background: Understanding and effectively managing self-harm and suicide requires collaborative research between stakeholders focused on shared priorities. Aims: To develop a consensus about suicide and self-harm research priorities in the North-West of England using the Delphi method. Method: Items for the Delphi survey were generated through group discussions at a workshop with 88 stakeholders and subsequent thematic analysis of key themes. Forty-four participants who were experts-by-experience, researchers, and clinicians based within health services including third sector organisations completed the Delphi survey. Results: A three-round survey reached consensus on 55 research priority items identifying key priorities in each of the following groups: offenders, children and young people, self-harm in community settings, and crisis care in the community. Limitation: The pool of delegates at the workshop and subsequent self-selection into the Delphi may have introduced bias into the study. Conclusion: The current paper highlights specific actionable priorities were identified in four areas that can be used to inform research efforts and future policy and practice, based on shared areas of perceived importance and concern. Future work is needed to confirm the significance of these priority areas, including the use of evidence synthesis approaches to ascertain the extent to which these priorities have already been investigated and where gaps in understanding remain.

Background: Socioeconomic disadvantage and lack of group belonging (i.e., social identity) have been linked to poor mental health. However, no research has investigated the relationship between neighbourhood identity and self-harm, nor whether identifying with one's neighbourhood can mitigate the effects of economic stress on self-harm. Methods: Pre-registered secondary data analysis of a large (N = 3412) community health survey conducted in disadvantaged areas of North West England. Results: Despite the sample having a relatively high and therefore restricted level of disadvantage, individual and geographic indicators of disadvantage, as well as neighbourhood identification, were unique and strong predictors of self-harm thoughts and behaviours across several analyses. Specifically, experiencing disadvantage and disidentification predicted significantly higher odds of self-harm and self-harm thoughts. No consistent interactive effects emerged. Limitations: The cross-sectional design limits firm conclusions regarding causal effects of neighbourhood identity and disadvantage on self-harm. However, causal direction is supported by past research and theory. The data is self-report, which is subject to response bias. The sample was also recruited from a region of the UK with low numbers of residents from ethnic minority backgrounds. Conclusions: The results are consistent with past research indicating an association between social identity and better mental health, but for the first time extend these effects to self-harm. The findings demonstrate the importance of considering social and economic factors when attempting to prevent suicide and understand and treat self-harm thoughts.