83
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    1
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What Are Reasons for the Large Gender Differences in the Lethality of Suicidal Acts? An Epidemiological Analysis in Four European Countries

      research-article

      Read this article at

      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

          In Europe, men have lower rates of attempted suicide compared to women and at the same time a higher rate of completed suicides, indicating major gender differences in lethality of suicidal behaviour. The aim of this study was to analyse the extent to which these gender differences in lethality can be explained by factors such as choice of more lethal methods or lethality differences within the same suicide method or age. In addition, we explored gender differences in the intentionality of suicide attempts.

          Methods and Findings

          Methods. Design: Epidemiological study using a combination of self-report and official data. Setting: Mental health care services in four European countries: Germany, Hungary, Ireland, and Portugal. Data basis: Completed suicides derived from official statistics for each country (767 acts, 74.4% male) and assessed suicide attempts excluding habitual intentional self-harm (8,175 acts, 43.2% male).

          Main Outcome Measures and Data Analysis. We collected data on suicidal acts in eight regions of four European countries participating in the EU-funded “OSPI-Europe”-project ( www.ospi-europe.com). We calculated method-specific lethality using the number of completed suicides per method * 100 / (number of completed suicides per method + number of attempted suicides per method). We tested gender differences in the distribution of suicidal acts for significance by using the χ 2-test for two-by-two tables. We assessed the effect sizes with phi coefficients (φ). We identified predictors of lethality with a binary logistic regression analysis. Poisson regression analysis examined the contribution of choice of methods and method-specific lethality to gender differences in the lethality of suicidal acts.

          Findings Main Results

          Suicidal acts (fatal and non-fatal) were 3.4 times more lethal in men than in women (lethality 13.91% (regarding 4106 suicidal acts) versus 4.05% (regarding 4836 suicidal acts)), the difference being significant for the methods hanging, jumping, moving objects, sharp objects and poisoning by substances other than drugs. Median age at time of suicidal behaviour (35–44 years) did not differ between males and females. The overall gender difference in lethality of suicidal behaviour was explained by males choosing more lethal suicide methods (odds ratio (OR) = 2.03; 95% CI = 1.65 to 2.50; p < 0.000001) and additionally, but to a lesser degree, by a higher lethality of suicidal acts for males even within the same method (OR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.32 to 2.02; p = 0.000005). Results of a regression analysis revealed neither age nor country differences were significant predictors for gender differences in the lethality of suicidal acts. The proportion of serious suicide attempts among all non-fatal suicidal acts with known intentionality (NFSAi) was significantly higher in men (57.1%; 1,207 of 2,115 NFSAi) than in women (48.6%; 1,508 of 3,100 NFSAi) (χ 2 = 35.74; p < 0.000001).

          Main limitations of the study

          Due to restrictive data security regulations to ensure anonymity in Ireland, specific ages could not be provided because of the relatively low absolute numbers of suicide in the Irish intervention and control region. Therefore, analyses of the interaction between gender and age could only be conducted for three of the four countries. Attempted suicides were assessed for patients presenting to emergency departments or treated in hospitals. An unknown rate of attempted suicides remained undetected. This may have caused an overestimation of the lethality of certain methods. Moreover, the detection of attempted suicides and the registration of completed suicides might have differed across the four countries. Some suicides might be hidden and misclassified as undetermined deaths.

          Conclusions

          Men more often used highly lethal methods in suicidal behaviour, but there was also a higher method-specific lethality which together explained the large gender differences in the lethality of suicidal acts. Gender differences in the lethality of suicidal acts were fairly consistent across all four European countries examined. Males and females did not differ in age at time of suicidal behaviour. Suicide attempts by males were rated as being more serious independent of the method used, with the exceptions of attempted hanging, suggesting gender differences in intentionality associated with suicidal behaviour. These findings contribute to understanding of the spectrum of reasons for gender differences in the lethality of suicidal behaviour and should inform the development of gender specific strategies for suicide prevention.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The gender gap in suicide and premature death or: why are men so vulnerable?

          Suicide and premature death due to coronary heart disease, violence, accidents, drug or alcohol abuse are strikingly male phenomena, particularly in the young and middle-aged groups. Rates of offending behaviour, conduct disorders, suicide and depression are even rising, and give evidence to a high gender-related vulnerability of young men. In explaining this vulnerability, the gender perspective offers an analytical tool to integrate structural and cultural factors. It is shown that traditional masculinity is a key risk factor for male vulnerability promoting maladaptive coping strategies such as emotional unexpressiveness, reluctance to seek help, or alcohol abuse. This basic male disposition is shown to increase psychosocial stress due to different societal conditions: to changes in male gender-role, to postmodern individualism and to rapid social change in Eastern Europe and Russia. Relying on empirical data and theoretical explanations, a gender model of male vulnerability is proposed. It is concluded that the gender gap in suicide and premature death can most likely be explained by perceived reduction in social role opportunities leading to social exclusion.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Suicide methods in Europe: a gender-specific analysis of countries participating in the “European Alliance Against Depression”

            Objective: To identify the most frequent gender-specific suicide methods in Europe. Design: Proportions of seven predominant suicide methods utilised in 16 countries participating in the European Alliance Against Depression (EAAD) were reported in total and cross-nationally. Relative risk (RR) relating to suicide methods and gender was calculated. To group countries by pattern of suicide methods, hierarchical clustering was applied. Setting and participants: Data on suicide methods for 119 122 male and 41 338 female cases in 2000–4/5 from 16 EAAD countries, covering 52% of European population were obtained. Results: Hanging was the most prevalent suicide method among both males (54.3%) and females (35.6%). For males, hanging was followed by firearms (9.7%) and poisoning by drugs (8.6%); for females, by poisoning by drugs (24.7%) and jumping from a high place (14.5%). Only in Switzerland did hanging rank as second for males after firearms. Hanging ranked first among females in eight countries, poisoning by drugs in five and jumping from a high place in three. In all countries, males had a higher risk than females of using firearms and hanging and a lower risk of poisoning by drugs, drowning and jumping. Grouping showed that countries might be divided into five main groups among males; for females, grouping did not yield clear results. Conclusions: Research on suicide methods could lead to the development of gender-specific intervention strategies. Nevertheless, other approaches, such as better identification and treatment of mental disorders and the improvement of toxicological aid should be put in place.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Sex and suicide. Gender differences in suicidal behaviour.

              K Hawton (2000)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                6 July 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 7
                : e0129062
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Saxonia, Germany
                [2 ]Institute of Behavioral Sciences, Semmelweis University Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
                [3 ]Department of Health Psychology, University Medical Center, Groningen, the Netherlands
                [4 ]CEDOC, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal
                [5 ]National Suicide Research Foundation and Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
                [6 ]Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, United Kingdom
                [7 ]Estonian-Swedish Mental Health and Suicidology Institute and Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia
                [8 ]LUCAS Center for care research and consultancy at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
                [9 ]London School of Economics, London, United Kingdom
                [10 ]Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy, National Institute for Health, Migration and Poverty, Rome, Italy & University “Gabriele d’Annunzio” Foundation, Chieti, Italy
                [11 ]Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
                [12 ]Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
                [13 ]Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, CEDOC, Universidade Nova de Lisboa & ISPUP, Institute of Public Health, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
                Medical University of Vienna, AUSTRIA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: UH RG EA MM AV CVA DMcD MS A. Schmidtke A. Székely AG JC. Performed the experiments: NK MT RG SQ CC AG. Analyzed the data: RM KH. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: NK MT RG SQ CC AG. Wrote the paper: RM NK KH A. Székely MT RG SQ EA CC MM AV CVA DMcD MS A. Schmidtke AG JC UH. Scientific consultancy: JC.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-00365
                10.1371/journal.pone.0129062
                4492725
                26147965
                9a079969-23d4-49df-bf56-688193d2b36f
                Copyright @ 2015

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                : 22 January 2015
                : 4 May 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Pages: 18
                Funding
                The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Commission ( ec.europa.eu) within the Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement N° 223138. The following authors received the funding: NK KH A. Székely MT RG SQ EA CC MM AV CVA DMcD MS A. Schmidtke AG JC UH. The authors also acknowledge support from the German Research Foundation (DFG) and Universität Leipzig within the program of Open Access Publishing. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                Data is freely available to any interested researcher on request, pending ethical approval. Readers of the manuscript can contact the following individuals to request the data: Professor Dr. Ulrich Hegerl (e-mail: Ulrich.Hegerl@ 123456medizin.uni-leipzig.de ) and Dr. Roland Mergl (e-mail: Roland.Mergl@ 123456medizin.uni-leipzig.de ).

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article