Aims To explore how consultation exercises were described in a convenience sample of recent scoping reviews. Design Critical literature review. Data sources We searched PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL and PubMed in July 2020. Our inclusion criterion was a peer‐reviewed journal article reporting a scoping review in Danish, English, Norwegian or Swedish. Review methods We identified a convenience sample of articles (n = 66) reporting a consultation exercise as part of a scoping review. The descriptions of the consultation were charted, summarized and critically discussed. Results The current analysis showed no widely accepted consensus on how to approach and report a consultation exercise in the sample of scoping reviews. The reports of stakeholder consultation processes were often brief and general, and often there were no reports of the effects of the stakeholder consultation processes. Further, there was no discussion of the principal theoretical problems mixing stakeholder voices and review findings. Conclusion The finding that conventional research ethics and research methods often were suspended could indicate that the stakeholder consultants were in a precarious position because of power imbalances between researchers and stakeholder consultants. We suggest that a consultation exercise should only be included when it genuinely invites participation and reports on the effect of alternative voices. Impact Scoping reviews are common across a range of disciplines, but they often lack definitional and methodological clarity. In their influential approach to scoping studies, Arksey and OʼMalley introduced an optional ‘consultation exercise’, which has been heralded as a valuable tool that can be used to strengthen the process and outcome of a scoping study and to support the dissemination of the studyʼs findings and its implications. However, there is no clear outline on about how to operationalize consultations of stakeholders in scoping studies/reviews. This article includes recommendations for consultation exercises, including encouraging an aspirational move from ‘consultation’ to ‘participation’.
Background There is a significantly higher number of people experiencing severe levels of suicidal thoughts compared to that of suicidal deaths and suicide attempts. In suicide prevention research, there is a shift towards greater emphasis on people's experiences of living with suicidal thoughts. This can expand the existing evidence base, which is dominated by a biomedical approach. The aim of this review was to summarise and disseminate existing research on the lived experiences of living with suicidal thoughts. Methods A scoping review by Arksey & O'Malley consisting of six stages: (1) formulating the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) selecting studies, (4) mapping data, (5) summarising the results and (6) consulting stakeholders. PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL were searched for studies in English, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian. Peer‐reviewed articles examining people's experiences of living with suicidal thoughts using qualitative methods were included. The search was supplemented with a citation pearl search in the Web of Science database. Twenty‐eight studies were included. Results The findings were organised under two thematic headings: (a) the significance of social connections and (b) a loss of the personal self. Conclusion There is a need for further qualitative research of people's experiences of living with suicidal thoughts from an everyday life perspective. Awareness about social connections and attachment in mental health prevention and governance is crucial. Trauma‐informed care could be a useful approach to prevent suicidal thoughts as the review found that many participants had traumatic experiences in both childhood and adulthood. As part of the treatment of suicidal thoughts, it might be useful to have a focus on narrative and communicative methods and their clinical application.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.