ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Systematic Review
Update

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review

[version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]
Previously titled: "The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: a living systematic review"
* Equal contributors
PUBLISHED 17 Jun 2021
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Emerging Diseases and Outbreaks gateway.

This article is included in the Living Evidence collection.

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable morbidity, mortality and disruption to people’s lives around the world. There are concerns that rates of suicide and suicidal behaviour may rise during and in its aftermath. Our living systematic review synthesises findings from emerging literature on incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour as well as suicide prevention efforts in relation to COVID-19, with this iteration synthesising relevant evidence up to 19th October 2020.
Method:  Automated daily searches feed into a web-based database with screening and data extraction functionalities. Eligibility criteria include incidence/prevalence of suicidal behaviour, exposure-outcome relationships and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes of interest are suicide, self-harm or attempted suicide and suicidal thoughts. No restrictions are placed on language or study type, except for single-person case reports. We exclude one-off cross-sectional studies without either pre-pandemic measures or comparisons of COVID-19 positive vs. unaffected individuals.
Results: Searches identified 6,226 articles. Seventy-eight articles met our inclusion criteria. We identified a further 64 relevant cross-sectional studies that did not meet our revised inclusion criteria. Thirty-four articles were not peer-reviewed (e.g. research letters, pre-prints). All articles were based on observational studies.
There was no consistent evidence of a rise in suicide but many studies noted adverse economic effects were evolving. There was evidence of a rise in community distress, fall in hospital presentation for suicidal behaviour and early evidence of an increased frequency of suicidal thoughts in those who had become infected with COVID-19.
Conclusions:  Research evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal behaviour is accumulating rapidly. This living review provides a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide risk as the longer term impacts of the pandemic on suicide risk are researched.

Keywords

COVID-19, Living systematic review, Suicide; Attempted suicide, Self-harm, Suicidal thoughts

Update Updates from Version 1

This update of our living systematic reviews includes literature up to October 2020 whereas our last was up to 7th June 2020. Searches identified 6,226 articles. Seventy-eight articles met our revised inclusion criteria, 49 more than in our previous review.  All were still based on observational studies. The majority of studies remained case series but there are now an increased number of service utilisation studies from across the world. There were still no studies were based on populations from sub-saharan Africa.  In contrast to the last update in which no studies reported on the change in incidence of suicide or suicidal behaviour after the onset of the pandemic compared with beforehand, we identified nine papers in this update, presenting data on studies from four countries which investigated the impact of COVID-19 on suicide rates.  To date, the highest quality data come from Japan which utilises suicide records covering the entire population; these data indicate that the impact of COVID-19 on suicides rates may change over time and have varying effects on different sections of the population. There was no consistent evidence of a rise in suicide but many studies noted adverse economic effects were evolving. There was evidence of a rise in community distress, fall in hospital presentation for suicidal behaviour and early evidence of an increased frequency of suicidal thoughts in those who had become infected with COVID-19. We have updated the author order to reflect contribution to this update, predominately related to oversight of specific tables and drafting specific sections of text. We have added new authors who have joined the screening team.

To read any peer review reports and author responses for this article, follow the "read" links in the Open Peer Review table.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic is causing widespread societal disruption, morbidity and loss of life globally. By the end of December 2020 over 85 million people had been infected and over 1.8 million had died (Worldometers, 2020). There are concerns about the impact of the pandemic on population mental health (Holmes et al., 2020). These stem from the impact of the virus itself on people infected (Taquet et al., 2021), as well as frontline workers caring for them (Kisely et al., 2020) and increases in bereavement. Other concerns relate to the impact on population mental health of the public health measures that have been implemented to minimise the spread of the virus – in particular physical distancing, leading to social isolation, disruption of businesses, services and education and threats to peoples’ livelihoods. Physical distancing measures and lockdowns have resulted in substantial rises in unemployment, falls in GDP and concerns that many nations will enter a prolonged period of deep economic recession.

There are concerns that suicide and self-harm rates may rise during and in the aftermath of the pandemic (Gunnell et al., 2020; Reger et al., 2020). Time-series modelling indicated that the 1918–20 Spanish Flu pandemic, which caused well over 20 million deaths worldwide, led to a modest rise in the national suicide rate in the USA (Wasserman, 1992) and Taiwan (Chang et al., 2020). Likewise, there is some evidence that previous epidemics and pandemics were associated with rises in suicide and suicidal behaviour (Zortea et al., 2020). Suicide rates increased briefly amongst people aged over 65 years in Hong Kong during the 2003 SARS epidemic, predominantly amongst those with more severe physical illness and physical dependency (Cheung et al., 2008).

The current context is, however, very different from previous epidemics and pandemics. The 2003 SARS epidemic was restricted to relatively few countries. Furthermore, during the 100-year period since the 1918–20 influenza pandemic, global and national health systems have improved, international travel and the speed of communication of information (and disinformation) have increased, antibiotics are available to treat secondary infection, and national economies have become globally inter-dependent. The availability of the internet and technological advancement has made it far easier for people to communicate and engage in home working and home schooling. However, there are marked social inequalities in relation to access to technology and ability to stay safe and continue to work, within and between countries. Public health policies and responses, and the degree of access to technology to facilitate online clinical assessments and treatments differ greatly between countries.

Key concerns in relation to suicide prevention during the pandemic include: encouraging help-seeking in those with suicidal thoughts and behaviours e.g. people who have attempted suicide may not attend hospitals because they are worried about contracting COVID-19 or being a burden on the healthcare system at this time; uncertainty regarding how best to assess and support people with suicidal thoughts and behaviours, whilst maintaining physical distancing and addressing any impacts of remote consultation; diminished access to community-based support; exposure to traumatic experiences; long term effect of infection with the virus on mental health (Taquet et al., 2021) and an economic recession may have an adverse impact on suicide rates (Chang et al., 2013; Stuckler et al., 2009). There have been increases in bereavement (with many being unusually complicated during the crisis), sales of alcohol (Finlay & Gilmore, 2020) and domestic violence (Mahase, 2020) – all risk factors for suicide (Turecki et al., 2019); the insensitive or irresponsible media reporting of suicide deaths associated with COVID-19 may be harmful (Hawton et al., 2021); and in some countries access to highly lethal suicide methods such as firearms and pesticides may rise (Anestis et al., 2021; Gunnell et al., 2020). However early findings from high income countries with ‘real-time’ suicide trend data, indicates there was no rise in suicide rates in the early months of the pandemic (John et al., 2020a). Japan is the exception to this rule, falls in Japanese suicide rates in the early months of the pandemic have since been replaced by rises above pre-pandemic levels July/August 2020 and beyond (John et al., 2020a; Tanaka & Okamoto, 2021; Ueda et al., 2021). The longer-term impact of the pandemic on suicide deaths and suicidal behaviour remains uncertain.

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic there is a rapidly expanding evidence base on its impact on suicide rates, and how best to mitigate such effects. It is therefore important that the best available knowledge is made rapidly available to policymakers, public health specialists and clinicians. To facilitate this, we are conducting a living systematic review focusing on incidence and prevention of suicide and self-harm in relation to COVID-19. Living systematic reviews are high-quality, up-to-date online summaries of research that are regularly updated, using efficient, often semi-automated, systems of production (Elliott et al., 2014). Our first report covered the period up to the 7th June 2020. This paper reports the second set of findings from the review, based on relevant articles identified up to 19th October 2020.

Aim

The overarching aim of the review is to identify and appraise any newly published evidence from around the world that assesses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide deaths, suicidal behaviours, self-harm and suicidal thoughts, or that assesses the effectiveness of strategies to reduce the risk of suicide deaths, suicidal behaviours, self-harm and suicidal thoughts, associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This living systematic review (Figure 1) follows published guidance for such reviews and for how expedited ‘living’ recommendations should be formulated where relevant (Akl et al., 2017; Elliott et al., 2017). The review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO ID CRD42020183326; registered on 1st May 2020). An overview of our living review process is provided in Figure 1. A protocol (John et al., 2020b) was published in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline (Moher et al., 2015) along with the first update of our review which summarised articles identified up to 7th June 2020 (John et al., 2020c). Since publication of our protocol we have amended our methodology to: 1) search additionally the PsyArXiv and SocArXiv open access paper repositories; 2) include modelling studies within the scope of our review (e.g. to predict the likely impact of the pandemic on suicide rates); 3) update our research questions to include studying the impact of adult self-neglect and parental neglect and fear of losing livelihood on suicide-related outcomes; 4) update our searches with any new citations from PsycINFO prior to each update; 5) exclude from data extraction and presentation in results tables single-wave, cross-sectional surveys unless they explicitly make comparisons with appropriate pre-pandemic measures or include comparative data between COVID-19 positive and unaffected individuals for pragmatic reasons, due to the volume of such studes but also issues to do with sampling and generalisability of such studies. Surveys that meet the original inclusion criteria are included as an appendix to the update.

1c3e45f8-5ce5-4780-8f02-8faadc8ec9f3_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Workflow for updating the living systematic review.

The process will be supported using automation technology and at three-monthly intervals the team will update the published version of the review.

Eligibility criteria

Study participants may be adults or children of any ethnicities living in any country. Outcomes of interest are:

  • 1. Deaths by suicide

  • 2. Self-harm (intentional self-injury or self-poisoning regardless of motivation and intent) or attempted suicide (including hospital attendance and/or admission for these reasons)

  • 3. Suicidal thoughts/ideation

Studies must address one of the following research questions:

(i) What is the prevalence/incidence?

  • Prevalence/incidence of each outcome during pandemic (including modelling studies)

(ii) What is the comparative prevalence/incidence?

  • Prevalence/incidence of each outcome during pandemic vs not during pandemic

(iii) What are the effects of interventions?

  • Effects of public health measures to combat COVID-19 (including physical distancing, school closures, interventions to address loss of income, interventions to tackle domestic violence) on each outcome

  • Effects of changed and new approaches to clinical management of (perceived) elevated risk of self-harm or suicide risk on each outcome (any type of intervention is relevant)

(iv) What are the effects of other exposures?

  • Impact of media portrayal on each outcome and misinformation attributed to the pandemic on each outcome

  • Impact of bereavement from COVID-19 on each outcome

  • Impact of any COVID-19 related behaviour changes (domestic violence, alcohol, adult self-neglect, parental neglect, cyberbullying, isolation) on each outcome

  • Impact of COVID-19-related workload on crisis lines on each outcome

  • Impact of infection with COVID-19 (self or family member) on each outcome

  • Impact of changes in availability of analgesics, firearms and pesticides on each outcome (method-specific and overall suicide rates)

  • Impact of COVID-19 related socio-economic exposures (changes in fiscal policy; recession/depression: unemployment, debt, fear of losing livelihood, deprivation at the person-, family- or small-area level) on each outcome

  • Impact on health and social care professionals: the stigma of working with COVID-19 patients or the (perceived) risk of infection/being a ‘carrier’, as well as work-related stress on each outcome

  • Impact of changes in/reduced intensity of treatment for patients with mental health conditions, in particular those with severe psychiatric disorders.

  • Impact of any other relevant exposure on our outcomes of interest.

Qualitative research

We included any qualitative research addressing perceptions or experiences around each outcome in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g. stigma of infection, isolation measures, complicated bereavement, media reporting, experience of delivering or receiving remote methods of self-harm / suicide risk assessment or provision of treatment; experience of seeking help for individuals in suicidal crisis); narratives provided for precipitating factors for each outcome.

No restrictions were placed on the types of study design eligible for inclusion, except for the exclusion of single-person case reports. Pre-prints will be re-assessed at the time of publication and the most current version included. There was no restriction on language of publication. We drew on a combination of internet-based translation systems and network of colleagues to translate reports in languages other than English.

Identification of eligible studies

We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed; Scopus; medRxiv, PsyArXiv; SocArXiv; bioRxiv; the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) by Semantic Scholar and the Allen Institute for AI, which includes relevant records from Microsoft Academic, Elsevier, arXiv and PMC; and the WHO COVID-19 database. A sample search strategy (for PubMed) appears in Box 1 from 1st January 2020 to 19th October 2020. We have developed a workflow that automates daily searches of these databases, and the code supporting this process can be found at https://github.com/mcguinlu/COVID_suicide_living). Searches are conducted daily via PubMed and Scopus application programme interface and the bioRxiv and medRxiv RSS feeds. Conversion scripts for the daily updated WHO and the weekly updated CORD-19 corpus are used to collect information from the remaining sources. The software includes a systematic search function based on regular expressions to search results retrieved from the WHO, CORD-19 and preprint repositories (search strategy available in extended data). Our review is ongoing and we continue to investigate the use of other databases and to capture articles made available prior to peer review and assess eligibility and review internally. For this update we therefore included PsyArXiv and SocArXiv repositories in our search strategy via their own open access platforms as we developed our automated system. PsycINFO searches were carried out retrospectively on 6th January 2021, using a publication date filter for 1st January 2020 to 19th October 2020.

A two-stage screening process was undertaken to identify studies meeting the eligibility criteria. First, two authors (either CO or EE) assessed citations from the searches and identified potentially relevant titles and abstracts. Second, either DG, AJ or RW assessed the full texts of potentially eligible studies to identify studies to be included in the review. This process was managed via a custom-built online platform (Shiny web app, supported by a MongoDB database). The platform allowed for data extraction via a built-in form.

Box 1. Search terms for PubMed

((selfharm*[TIAB] OR self-harm*[TIAB] OR selfinjur*[TIAB] OR self-injur*[TIAB] OR selfmutilat*[TIAB] OR self-mutilat*[TIAB] OR suicid*[TIAB] OR parasuicid*[TIAB) OR (suicide[TIAB] OR suicidal ideation[TIAB] OR attempted suicide[TIAB]) OR (drug overdose[TIAB] OR self?poisoning[TIAB]) OR (self-injurious behavio?r[TIAB] OR self?mutilation[TIAB] OR automutilation[TIAB] OR suicidal behavio?r[TIAB] OR self?destructive behavio?r[TIAB] OR self?immolation[TIAB])) OR (cutt*[TIAB] OR head?bang[TIAB] OR overdose[TIAB] OR self?immolat*[TIAB] OR self?inflict*[TIAB]))) AND ((coronavirus disease?19[TIAB] OR sars?cov?2[TIAB] OR mers?cov[TIAB]) OR (19?ncov[TIAB] OR 2019?ncov[TIAB] OR n?cov[TIAB]) OR ("severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2" [Supplementary Concept] OR "COVID-19" [Supplementary Concept] OR COVID-19 [tw] OR coronavirus [tw] OR nCoV[TIAB] OR HCoV[TIAB] OR ((virus*[Title] OR coronavirus[Title] OR nCoV[Title] OR infectious[Title] OR HCoV[Title] OR novel[Title])AND (Wuhan[Title] OR China[Title] OR Chinese[Title] OR 2019[Title] OR 19[Title] OR COVID*[Title] OR SARS-Cov-2[Title] OR NCP*[Title]) OR “Coronavirus”[MeSH]))))

Data collection and assessment of risk of bias

One author (DG, AJ or RW) extracted data from each included study using a piloted data extraction form, and the extracted data were checked by one other author (DG, KH, EA, RC, AJ, or EE where AJ extracted data, AJ where DG extracted data). Disagreements were resolved through discussion, and where this failed, by referral to a third reviewer (KH, NK or PM). Irrespective of study design, data source and outcome measure examined, the following basic information were extracted: citation; study aims and objectives; country/setting; characteristics of participants; methods; outcome measures (related to self-harm / suicidal behaviour and COVID-19); key findings; strengths and limitations; reviewer’s notes. For articles where causal inferences are made - i.e. randomised or non-randomised studies examining the effects of interventions or aetiological epidemiological studies of the effects of specific exposures – we plan to use a suitable version of the ROBINS-I or a preliminary similar tool for exposure studies to assess risk of bias as appropriate based on the research question and study design (Morgan et al., 2017; Sterne et al., 2016).

Data synthesis

We synthesised studies according to themes based on research questions and study design, using tables and narrative. Results were synthesised separately for studies in the general population, in health and social care staff and other at-risk occupations, and in vulnerable populations (e.g. people of older age or those with underlying conditions that predispose them to becoming severely ill or dying after contracting COVID-19) where relevant. Where multiple studies addressed the same research questions, we assessed whether meta-analysis was appropriate and would conduct it where suitable, following standard guidance available in the Cochrane Handbook (Deeks et al., 2019). The current document is the second iteration of our review. We have not considered it appropriate to combine any results identified so far in a meta-analysis due to quality and heterogeneity.

Results

In total, 12,397 citations were identified by 19th October 2020 from all electronic searches, after duplicates were removed (Figure 2). The cumulative numbers of articles over time that were identified by the search and included in the review are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. The majority of studies identified in the review (5105; 82%) were sourced from two databases, PubMed and WHO; a further 10% (n=622) were drawn from pre-print sites such as MedRxiv.

1c3e45f8-5ce5-4780-8f02-8faadc8ec9f3_figure2.gif

Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram.

1c3e45f8-5ce5-4780-8f02-8faadc8ec9f3_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Number of articles identified by database and repository over time.

1c3e45f8-5ce5-4780-8f02-8faadc8ec9f3_figure4.gif

Figure 4. Number of articles selected by database and repository over time.

Description of included studies

We included 78 articles in the review. We have highlighted in Table 1Table 6 where new citations have updated existing studies. Sixty-four cross sectional surveys are included in Appendix 1. In total, six studies spanned several countries or were worldwide, including one using a Reddit mental health dataset (almost half of users are from the USA); 13 were from the United States; seven from China; nine from India; five from the United Kingdom; four each from Japan and Nepal; and between one and three each from Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Qatar and Switzerland. All articles were based on observational studies: twenty-five were case series with a sample of two or more (although Jefsen et al., 2020a and Rohde et al., 2020 were based on the same case series); thirteen were cross sectional surveys; two were based on social media posts; six were modelling studies; twenty were service utilisation studies; and nine assessed suicide rates. Studies are summarised by these study types in Table 1 through Table 6. Three other relevant articles were identified, two of these described mixed methods studies (Evans et al., 2020; Son et al., 2020) and one a case-control study (Cai et al., 2020). Almost half (n=34) of the articles did not appear to have been peer- reviewed of which ten were pre-prints and 21 were published as research letters to the Editor.

Table 1. Summary of included case series.

AuthorsGeographyData usedOutcomeConclusionsComment/ Limitations
Ahmed et al., 2020IndiaSuicide cases linked with alcohol
withdrawal syndrome (AWS) reported in
newspapers or news channels’ websites
from 25 March (start of national
lockdown) to 5 May 2020. All cases were
in the states of the southern part of
India: Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana,
and Karnataka. (n=23)
Suicide deathAWS seems implicated in a number of
suicides in southern India but, on the
basis of the empirical information that
is presented here, we do not know
whether these deaths were caused by
the COVID-19 lockdown, and whether
these deaths occurred at a higher
frequency during the observation period
than they normally occur.
We cannot be sure whether any of the
suicides occurred primarily as a direct
consequence of AWS, or were brought
about due to the unavailability of alcohol
during lockdown.

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Letter to the editor, so unlikely to be peer
reviewed.
Bhuiyan et al., 2020BangladeshNews reports of COVID-19 related
suicide deaths
(n=8)
Suicide deathJob loss, debt and difficulties obtaining
food because of financial difficulties
reported in all cases
Small sample size (n=8)

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Letter to editor, probably not peer
reviewed.
Boshra & Islam, 2020BangladeshSuicide cases relating to COVID-19 taken
from Bangladeshi online media
INITIAL REPORT: 1 March to 31 July 2020
(n=32)

UPDATED REPORT published October
27th (Boshra et al., 2020): 1 March to 30
Sept 2020 (n=37). 65% of the cases were
male.
Suicide death45.9% were due to economic reasons
attributed to lockdown-related
unemployment.
Although they examined only cases
relating to COVID-19, the authors
recognize they do not know how many
cases would have occurred if the
pandemic had not happened.

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Pre-print, not peer reviewed.
Buschmann & Tsokos, 2020aGermanyCase series of 10 individuals identified at
autopsy who died by suicide during the
pandemic up to March 25th 2020


UPDATED REPORT (Buschmann & Tsokas, 2020b) Individuals identified at
autopsy who died by suicide associated
with the effects of the pandemic up to
29 May 2020 (n=11)
Suicide deathAll had pre-existing mental health issues.
No evidence of COVID-19.





Authors conclude that the effects of
the lockdown and media reporting
influenced the suicide.
It is unclear what circumstances of the
deceased persons were brought about
directly due to the COVID-19 crisis.

Both are Letters to editor, probably not
peer reviewed.
Dsouza et al., 2020IndiaNews reports (n=69) of COVID-19 related
suicide deaths including n=72 cases
from March to 24 May 2020. Age range
19–65 years; 63 (88%) males.
Suicide deathThe most common reported factors
were:
1) Fear of infection (n=21);
2) Financial crisis (n=19);
3) COVID-19 related stress (n=9);
4) Positive test for COVID-19 (n=7);
5) Isolation related issues (n=5)
6)Social boycott (n=4); and
7) Migrant unable to return home (n=3).
Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Overlaps with other publications based
on news reports from same country e.g.
Rajkumar, 2020;
Shoib et al., 2020.

Letter to editor, probably not
peer reviewed.
Griffiths & Mamun, 2020Global
-Bangladesh,
India,
Malaysia, USA
News reports of couples (n=6) engaging
in COVID-19-related suicidal behaviour
includes one murder suicide identified
via Searches of seven English- Indian
online papers from March to 24 May.
Suicide attempt
and/or death
(couples)
Details several potential reasons:
1) Fear of infection;
2) Money problems (due to recession
associated with lockdowns);
3) Harassment or victimisation by others
due to (possibly perceived) infection
status;
4) Stress of being in isolation or
quarantine; and
5) Uncertainty of when the pandemic
will end.
Small sample size (n=6)


Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Letter to editor, probably not peer
reviewed.
Iqbal et al., 2020QatarReferrals of patients with a positive
COVID-19 test to consultant liaison
psychiatry service from a ward or A&E
in three hospitals in Doha, . Median age
39.5; 48 male (n=50)
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
Three of the 50 referrals had self
harmed. The self-harm was apparently
a reaction to the pandemic. Two were
asymptomatic for COVID-19, and one
had a mild case.
Focus is on psychiatric presentations in
people with acute infections, the long
term impact of COVID-19 infection on
psychiatric morbidity requires further
study.

Peer reviewed.
Jefsen et al., 2020a
Rohde et al., 2020
DenmarkReview of notes of adult patients from
the psychiatric services of the Central
Denmark Region (catchment area: 1.3
million people).

Notes between 1 Feb and 23 March
2020 reviewed to identify those
describing "pandemic-related psychiatric
symptoms" (including "self harm /
suicidality", n=74). Median age 29.8
years; 77% female

Note full case series n=1357 relevant
records found from 412,804, reported in
Rohde et al.,, 2020.
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm, suicidal
thoughts
Of the 74 patients identified, 14 (19%)
had self-harm thoughts; 10 (14%) had
self-harmed; 34 (46%) had suicidal
thoughts; 10 (14%) had made suicide
attempts and 13 (18%) had a passive
wish to die from COVID-19.
Findings restricted to suicidal / self-harm
related outcomes in 74 patients with
these outcomes.

No data on the overall percentage of
adult psychiatry patients with these
outcomes during or pre-pandemic.

Peer-reviewed letter to the editor.
Jefsen et al., 2020bDenmarkAll clinical notes from patients below
18 years old in the Central Danish
psychiatric service between 1 Feb
and 23 March 2020.

Pandemic‐related psychopathology
identified in 94 children
and adolescents.
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
8 notes from 5 of the 94 patients
specifically described self‐harm or
suicidality related to the pandemic
No baseline data for individuals.

No data on the overall percentage of
child psychiatry patients with these
outcomes during or pre-pandemic.

Editorial perspective; probably not peer
reviewed.
Jolly et al., 2020USAChild and adolescent psychiatry
inpatients, age range 11–17 years; 3
female, 1 male; (n=4).
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm, Suicidal
thoughts
One suicide attempt; one suicidal plan
and two with suicidal thoughts

Stressors described included:
1. Unable to see friends/ partner (all
cases)
2. Arguments with parents
3. Misunderstanding within friendship
group that could not be resolved well
over social media
4. Academic worries- performance
declined since move to distance learning
5. Feeling isolated
Detailed descriptive study of very small
sample.

Peer reviewed journal.
Kapilan, 2020IndiaNews reports about two nurses drawn
from news reports (n=2)
Suicide death,
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
1 suicide: a nurse who treated COVID-19
patients, and died reportedly due to
“ extreme stress and mental disturbance”
1 suicide attempt: a nurse who
contracted COVID-19
Small sample size (n=2)

Information drawn from news reports.
Similar to Rahman & Plummer, 2020.

Letter to the editor; possibly not peer
reviewed.
Kar et al., 2020IndiaNews reports of deaths by suicide
among film stars in India, 28 May to 30
July 2020 (n=7).
Suicide death 7 Indian film stars who died by suicide.
Media reports claimed three of these
were related to financial problems
associated with COVID-19.
It is unclear whether any of the deaths
were strongly linked with COVID-19
and its indirect impact on people's lives, or
whether the individuals were already
experiencing mental health difficulties.

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Appears to use the same data as Mamun et al., 2020b.

Letter to the editor; probably not peer
reviewed.
Mamun et al., 2020aBangladeshNews report of suicide pact in mother
and 22 year old son, 11 Jun 2020 (n=2)
Suicide deathUniversity student aged 22 and his
mother aged 47 died by suicide. The
father had insisted the day before that
the student complete online exams as
an internet connection was arranged.
Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Only a single pact reported

Suggests that online teaching in LMIC
may create real tensions due to digital
poverty

Letter to the editor; possibly not peer
reviewed.
Mamun et al., 2020bIndiaNews reports of deaths by suicide
among film stars in India (n=7 in 2020
vs. n=16 in 2002–2019)
Suicide deathThe frequency of celebrity suicides
in India appears to have increased
markedly during the COVID-19 era.

The authors highlight the dangers of
sensationalised media reporting of
celebrity suicides triggering immitative
events in the general population.
Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Appears to use the same data as Kar et al., 2020

Letter to the editor; possibly not peer
reviewed.
Mamun & Ullah, 2020PakistanNews reports of COVID-19 related
suicide deaths in Pakistan, Jan 2020
to end April 2020 (n=12, a further 4
reports of suspected suicide were not
presented).
Suicide deathEconomic concerns reported in 8/12
cases, and fear of infection in the
remaining 4.

There were 13 other reports of suicides
(and attempted suicide) during this
period not reported to be linked to
COVID-19.
Highlights the potential importance of
the economic impact of COVID-19 and/or
public health measures on influencing
suicide in low- and middle-income
countries.

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Peer reviewed journal; paper accepted
on same day as received.
Nalleballe et al., 2020WorldAdult COVID-19 patients (inpatients and
outpatients) with records held on the
TriNetX database (trinetx.com),
20 Jan to 10 June 2020 (n= 40,469, 76%
living in USA
Suicidal
thoughts
9,086 (22.5%) had a neuropsychiatric
coded diagnosis within 1 month of
COVID-19 diagnosis. 62 (0.2%) had
suicidal thoughts recorded.
Large clinical database of people with
clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. It is
possible that suicidal thoughts were not
asked about systematically by clinicians
and so there is likely to be marked
under-recording.

Peer reviewed journal.
Pirnia et al., 2020IranSuicide of members of one family (n=2).Suicide deathSon died by suicide three weeks after his
father died of COVID-19. Two days after
the son, the mother also killed herself.
Small sample size (n=-2).

Letter to the editor; probably not peer
reviewed.
Rahman & Plummer, 2020WorldwideNews reports of nurse suicide deaths
(n=6, 2 from Italy, 1 each from UK,
Mexico, USA and India)
Suicide deathFactors reported as associated with
deaths included: fear they had become
infected; positive test result; being in
quarantine; fearful of becoming infected.
Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Small sample size (n=6).

Similar to Kapilan, 2020.

Peer reviewed letter to the editor.
Rajkumar, 2020India49 English-language news reports of
COVID-19 related suicides in India, 12
March to 11 April 2020 (n=23 deaths)
Suicide death6 of the deaths occurred amongst
patients hospitalised / in isolation
In 7 cases a diagnosis was mentioned
- in 4 this was depression, in 3 alcohol
dependence.
Precipitating / contributing factors
included fear of acquiring infection
(9/23); developing influenza-like
symptoms (7/23); bereavement (n=5)
Study uses news reports In English as
their data source.


Provides interesting observations, useful
for hypothesis testing.

Probable overlap with others e.g. Dsouza et al., 2020; Shoib et al., 2020

Letter to the editor, possibly not peer
reviewed.
Sahoo et al., 2020IndiaClinical case reports of COVID-19 related
suicide attempts presenting to the ED
(n=2)
Suicide attemptsBoth cases were related to the fear
and stigma of COVID-19. One case was
ordered to self-isolate due to being in
contact with a known case.
Small sample size (n=2)

Letter to editor; probably not peer
reviewed.
Shoib et al., 2020IndiaNews reports in 22 English and local
newspapers published in India,
identified from Google and reporting on
suicides in relation to COVID-19 Search
period 25 Jan to 18 April 2020 (n=34
suicides)
Suicide death18 (52.9%) aged 18–35 years; 28 (82.4%)
male
Most frequent reasons given: Fear of
infection: 16 (47.1%); misinterpreted
fever as COVID-19: 9 (26.5%); Depression
and loneliness: 7 (20.6%); personal
stigma of COVID-19: 4 (11.8%)

Authors mapped number of reports
vs number of suicides over the 8 week
study period. Rise in COVID-19 related
suicides mirrored the rise in number
of cases - in first 3 weeks there was 1
report per week, whereas in the last 3
weeks there were 23 reports
Large case series of news reports,
but probably overlaps with others e.g.
Dsouza et al., 2020; Rajkumar, 2020.

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Letter to the editor, possibly not peer
reviewed.
Syed & Griffiths, 2020IndiaReports of alcohol-related suicides from
India, extracted from recent media
reports, using Google News, retrieving
reports of suicide cases from Indian
online English language newspapers
between 25 March and 17 May 2020
(during India’s national lockdown). Age
range 25–70 years; all males (n=27)
Suicide death,
Suicide attempts
27 cases suicide or suicide attempts.

Alcohol restrictions were reported as
leading to an increase in attempts and
deaths, because of alcohol withdrawal
syndrome.
Case reports from newspapers in English
in Indian news.

Underreporting possible because of
stigma.

Similar to Shoib et al., 2020.

Letter to the editor; possibly not peer
reviewed.
Thakur & Jain, 2020WorldNews reports of COVID-19 related
suicide deaths (n=7)
Suicide deathIdentified 4 types of suicide risks:
1) Social isolation;
2) Economic;
3) Stress in health professionals;
4) Stigma
Small sample size (n=7)

Study uses news reports as their data
source.

Peer reviewed journal; paper accepted 1
day after received.
Valdés-Florido et al., 2020SpainPatients admitted to two hospitals in
Spain with reactive psychoses in the
context of the COVID-19 crisis during
the first two weeks of lockdown (n=4)
Suicide attemptsStress from the pandemic thought to
have triggered reactive psychoses in
four patients two of whom presented
with severe suicidal behaviour
Small sample size (n=4)

Peer reviewed journal.

Table 2. Summary of cross sectional surveys and cohort studies.

AuthorsGeographyData usedOutcomeConclusionsComment/ Limitations
Debowska et al., 2020PolandUniversity students recruited via 10 Polish
universities and the Students’ Parliament
of the Republic of Poland. N = 7228, 81%
female; Mean age = 22.78.
Data collection occurred in five waves,
during the first two months of the COVID-19
pandemic in Europe (March – April 2020).
The waves differed from one another in
the amount and type of lockdown-type
measures, with wave 4 being characterised
by the strictest restrictions
Suicidal thoughtsNo statistical evidence of differences
in suicidal thoughts over the 5 stages
of data collection or of gender
differences in prevalence.
Representativeness of sample unclear
Frequency and intensity of suicidal
thoughts and impulses in the past 24
h were measured using the Depressive
Symptom Inventory-Suicidality Subscale
(Joiner et al., 2002)

Letter to editor, probably not peer
reviewed
Hamm et al., 2020USASubset of adults aged >60 years who
were participating in an RCT of treatment
resistant depression and agreed to a
qualitative interview.
N=73 (of total 743 RCT participants)
Suicide and self-harm
thoughts
5(7%) had suicidal thoghts at the time
of the interview (April 1–23 2020), but
not pre-pandemic; 7 (10%) had had
a reduction in pre-existing suicidal
thoughts. The rest had no suicidal
thoughts pre or post pandemic
Used PHQ-9 pre and post pandemic
(validated measure)

Those agreeing to interview self-
selecting, perhaps less likely to have
experienced untoward effects.

Small sample

Peer reviewed
Hamza et al., 2021CanadaStudents at a single university in Canada
Surveyed using the same survey tool in May
2019 and May 2020. n=773 (74% female;
mean age 18.5 years)
( 964 responders to 2019 survey)
Suicide attempts/
self-harm
No statistical evidence evidence of rise
in NSSI: score at T1 (May 2019) 0.18
(SD 0.38) and T 2 (May 2020) 0.20 (SD
0.40)

Likewise no difference when analysis
stratified according to presence of
absence of pre-existing mental health
concerns
Used adapted version of the Inventory
of Statements about Self-Injury (ISAS;
Klonsky & Glenn, 2009) to assess
non-suicidal self-harm in relation to
7 behaviours e.g. cutting / biting.
Reported average score on ISAS scale
rather than prevalence of each / any
behaviour

Peer reviewed
Iob et al., 2020UKGeneral population sample recruited on-
line via media / social media. Survey data
from 21 March – 20 April 2020. Participants
included individuals who provided data on
abuse, self-harm and thoughts of suicide or
self-harm on at least one occasion
n = 44 775
Weighted to represent UK population (age,
sex, ethnicity, education)
Suicide attempts/
selfharm, suicide and
self-harm thoughts

Help seeking
7984 (18%) reported suicidal / self-
harm thoughts; 2174 (5%) had self
harmed at least once. Suicide/self-
harm thoughts higher in those with a
COVID-19 diagnosis vs. without (33%
vs 17%); likewise for suicide attempts
(14% vs. 5%). 57% of those engaging
in SH and 40% with thoughts had
sought some professional support.

Compared with previous UK survey
data, levels of help-seeking from MH
professionals (14.5% for thoughts /
4.7% SH/SA) were lower. (14.5% for
thoughts / 4.7% SH/SA) were lower.
Suicidal / self-harm thoughts
measured via PHQ-9. Self harm via
asking participants whether they’d
self-harmed or deliberately hurt
themselves. Index period was the last
week.

Large sample but convenience
sampling
Use of sample weighting to take
account of selection bias

Report on outcomes in relation to
COVID-19 diagnosis but may be
confounded by sociodemographic
differences between groups

Peer reviewed
Raifman et al., 2020USATwo nationally representative surveys
of US adults: 1) The 2017–2018 National
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(NHANES)- 5085 (86.8%) of 5856 NHANES
participants responded to suicidal
ideation questions and were included in
the analyses; 2) 2020 COVID-19 and Life
Stressors Impact on Mental Health and
Wellbeing study (CLIMB) - conducted 31st
March to 13th April 2020. 1415 (96.3%) of
1470 CLIMB participants responded to all
questions relevant to the analysis
Suicidal thoughtsSuicidal ideation increased more than
fourfold, from 3.4% in the 2017–2018
NHANES to 16.3% in the 2020 CLIMB
survey, and from 5.8% to 26.4%
among participants in low-income
households. Suicidal ideation was
more prevalent among people facing
difficulty paying rent (31.5%), job loss
(24.1%), and loneliness (25.1%).
Survey methods for NHANES and
CLIMB were not identical, but two large
population-based surveys conducted at
two points.

Characteristics of participants in CLIMB
and NHANES differed. Respondents
may have differed from those who
did not, particularly if the stressors
examined affected survey participation.

Pre-print, not peer reviewed
Sueki & Ueda, 2020JapanTwo wave population survey of Japanese
people aged >20.
Recruited via Internet Survey company to
reflect census population of Japan.
6683 completed both waves of the survey
(out of 125,011 people selected (5%) and
67% of the 9982 who completed the wave
1 survey)
51% male; mean age 46.5 years.
Surveyed Jan 24 2020 (when there were just
2 covid-19 cases in Japan) and again 27–30
April, 3 weeks after state of emergency
declared.
Suicidal thoughtsSuicidal thoughts score was lower
during the pandemic (mean = 1.59)
than before it (mean = 1.71),t(6682) =
5.87, p < .001.
People in their 30s, and people: a)
with unstable employment status
(part-time, temporary worker), b)
without children, c) with relatively
low annual household income and d)
those currently receiving psychiatric
care had higher suicidal thoughts
scores at T2 vs. the reference group,
after controlling for suicidal ideation
at T1
Short-form suicide ideation scale"
(Sueki, 2019). 6 questions, overall
scores ranges from 0–12.
Low response rate from selected
sample (5%)
And at T2 vs T1 (67%).

Pre-print, not peer reviewed
Wang et al., 2020aChinaCOVID 19 patients and controls January 2,
2020 to March 10, 2020.
376 COVID-19 patients (including 95 male
and 281 female patients) hospitalized
between January 2 and March10, 2020,with
501 controls without COVID 19 (including
110 men and 391 women) recruited from
different social media platforms
Suicidal thoughtsIn Covid-19 patients moderate or high
suicide risk in 27 % COVID-19 patients
vs. 8 % in control (sig difference).
High or very high suicide risk similarly
higher in Covid group 10% vs. 4%.
Age, anxiety, depression and poor
sleep quality were all risk factors for
high suicide risk in COVID-19 patients.
Online or face to face interview
assessment by psychiatrists using the
Nurses’ Global Asesment of Suicide
Risk scale(NGASR).

Convenience sampled controls

Unlikely to be peer reviewed
Wang et al., 2020bChinaRepeat cross sectional study. Participants
who completed survey via “Wenjuanxing,” a
Chinese online platform providing functions
equivalent to Qualtrics.

The data were from two studies, one
conducted during the outbreak stage from
(N=2540, mean age = 25.28 ± 8.07) and one
conducted during the after peak stage
(N=2543, mean age = 22.03 ± 6.30)
Symptom networks
illustrating the
relationship between
depression and
anxiety symptoms
were estimated

Suicidal thoughts
showed a decreased
connection with
“inability to relax” and
“guilty” symptoms,
whereas suicidal
thoughts showed an
increased connection
with the “too much
worry” symptom over
time
The association between symptoms
changed over the course of the
pandemic in China

Some changes in connections
between some symptoms of suicidal
thoughts and other symptoms of
depression/anxiety

If generalizable, could point to some
treatment targets that are more
central to suicide risk
Limitation: anxiety and depression
assessed via self-report not diagnoses

Used PHQ-9

Not certain how generalizable networks
are to other phases of the pandemic or
to other countries

Peer reviewed
Winkler et al., 2020Czech
Republic
Covid-19 survey 6th to 20th May 2020.:
N=3021 respondents interviewed either
by computer-assisted telephone interview
or computer assisted web interviewing.
General population aged 18–64 years. The
survey was representative in relation to
national population (age, sex, education
and region)
Comparable baseline data were obtained
from the 2017 Czech Mental Health Survey.
Suicide riskMarked increase in respondents with
moderate/high suicide risk from 3.9%
(95% CI 3.2, 4.5) in 2017 to 12.3 (11.1,
13.4) in 2020. Having been tested for
Covid-19 (with a positive or negative
result) was linked with elevated
perceived suicide risk (OR 2.1; 1.1, 3.8)
as was Covid-19 health worries (OR
1.4; 1.1, 2.1) and Covid-19 economic
worries (OR 1.4; 1.2, 1.7).
Mini International Neuropsychiatric
Interview (MINI)
Large nationally representative survey
with comparable baseline data but
Covid-19 survey was conducted
remotely whereas the baseline survey
was face-to-face interviewing, so
information bias cannot be ruled
out. Computer-assisted telephone
interviewing had a low participation
rate.

Peer reviewed
Wu et al., 2020aChinaSurvivors of COVID-19, followed up
median 22 days (IQR 20–30d) post hospital
discharge.
N=370
Suicide and Self-harm
thoughts
4 (1.1%) reported experiencing
suicidal / self-harm thoughts over
several days
Large survey of hospital admitted
COVID-19
No pre-illness baseline measure.

Used PHQ-9 (standardised measure).

Letter to editor, probably not peer
reviewed.
Wu el al., 2020bChina4124 pregnant women during their third
trimester from 25 public hospitals in 10
provinces Jan 1st-Feb 9th 2020
1285 assessed after January 20, 2020 when
the coronavirus epidemic was publicly
announced and 2839
were assessed before this time point.
Self-harm thoughts A multi-centre study to
identify mental health concerns in
pregnancy The risk of self-harm
thoughts was higher after 20th January
compared to before (aRR=2.85, 95%
CI: 1.70, 8.85, P=0.005).
Pre-existing data collection system.

Thoughts of self-harm in the last 7
days from the Edinburgh Postnatal
Depression Scale (EPDS, Cox et al.,., 1987)

The findings indicate a need for
enhanced levels of psychological
support for pregnant women during
a major infectious disease epidemic /
pandemic.
Pregnant women in Wuhan, Hubei
Province (the epicentre of the epidemic)
were not included in the sample.

Peer reviewed
Zhao et al., 2020ChinaSurvey of COVID-19 patients (n=106), 46
male, range 35–92 years at Tongji Hospital,
Wuhan from Carried out February 2nd-
16th, 2020
Suicide and Self-harm
thoughts
24.5% (26/106) of COVID-19 patients
had self-harming or suicidal thoughts,
which were "significantly higher
percentages than those of the general
population."
Highlights the potential mental health
support needs, and the risk faced by
recovering COVID-19 patients.

Used PHQ-9.

Peer reviewed
Zhang et al., 2020ChinaRepeated survey in cohort of primary and
secondary school children / adolescents
from two counties before the outbreak
started (wave 1, early November 2019) and
2 weeks after school reopening (wave 2,
mid-May 2020) in an area of China with low
risk of COVID-19.
1389 children recruited
1271 completed info for W1. 1241 W2,
response rate 93.1%.
Mean [SD] age, 12.6 [1.4] years; age range,
9.3–15.9 years; 736 [59.3%] male).
NSSI
Suicidal thoughts
Suicide plans
NSSI (42.0% in 2020 vs 31.8% in
2019; aOR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.17-1.55];
P < .001), suicide ideation (29.7% vs
22.5%; aOR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.08-1.62];
P = .008), suicide plan (14.6% vs 8.7%;
aOR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.31-2.24]; P <
.001), and suicide attempt (6.4% vs
3.0%; aOR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.14-2.67]; P
< .001).

OR adjusted for sex, body mass index,
self-perceived household economic
status, family cohesion, parental
conflict, academic stress, parental
educational level, family adverse life
events, self-perceived health, sleep
duration, and sleep disorders
For NSSI, asking ‘In the past 12 months,
have you ever harmed yourself in a way
that was deliberate, but not intended
to take your life?’.

Suicidal ideation, plans and attempts-
from the 2013 Youth Risk Behaviour
Surveillance System in the USA

Pre-covid data

Total number of children in years 4–8
not given so not sure of % recruited
and therefore representativeness
Seasonal variations and
secular trends not accounted for.

Peer reviewed

Table 3. Summary of social media platform posts studies.

AuthorsGeographyData usedOutcomeConclusionsComment/ Limitations
Low et al., 2020Demographic information
is unknown but Reddit
users are predominantly
American (49.9%)
Reddit Mental Health Dataset
including posts from 826,961
unique users from 2018 to
2020.
Using unsupervised clustering,
they found the suicidality and
loneliness clusters more than
doubled in the number of posts
during the pandemic.

The Reddit support groups for
borderline personality disorder
and posttraumatic stress disorder
became significantly associated
with the suicidality cluster

The suicidality cluster doubled in
size and a new cluster surrounding
self-harm emerged.
Using natural language
processing (NLP) on text from
some of the world’s largest
mental health support groups
it is possible to identify mental
health problems as they
emerge in real time and to
identify vulnerable sub-groups
Such approaches could help
subreddit moderators track who is in
need of assistance as well as well the
concerns of specific communities are

No formal diagnoses are made,
reliant on what authors post

Selection bias related to who posts
as well as when they post and
how they cope under different
circumstances

Peer reviewed
Saha et al., 2020USA∼60M Twitter streaming
posts originating from the
U.S. from 24 March-24 May
2020, and compare these
with ∼40M posts from the
comparable period in 2019
A 20% increase in frequency of
posts that made reference to
suicidal ideation was observed
during 2020.
Suicide risk is multifaceted.
More attention directed at
population-scale mental
healthcare, such as universal
screening approaches
Analysis of Twitter content makes
good use of readily available data
and may reveal patterns and trends
that are not easily discernible by
conducting research using more
traditional methods but what state
in their posts does not necessarily
reflect trends in suicidality in the
population.

Not peer reviewed. Pre-print.

Table 4. Summary of studies using modelling approaches to estimate the possible impact of the pandemic on suicide rates.

AuthorsCountry
/ region
Data used to inform estimateModel predictionComment / Limitations
Bhatia, 2020aUSAPrevious research modelling the association of
unemployment with suicide in the USA indicating a
1% rise in unemployment was associated with a 1%
rise in suicide.

Assumes unemployment in the USA has risen from
3.8% to over 20%
7444 additional suicides in the following 2
months
There were approximately 48,000 suicides in
USA in 2018, so this equates to a predicted
15% rise in suicides in the USA.
No account for potential impacts of pandemic other
than via unemployment rises
Duration of unemployment rises uncertain

Pre-print, not peer reviewed.
Bhatia, 2020bUSAMeta-analysis of longitudinal studies investigating
the association of duration of unemployment with
risk of suicide: used estimate of 2.5 fold increase
in risk during 1–5 years of unemployment, derived
from one Swedish and one Finnish cohort. National
bureau of Health statistics: age adjusted suicide
rates
US Dept of Labour: weekly unemployment claims
US Bureau of Labour Statistics: are distribution of
workforce
Estimated 9,786 additional suicides per year
There were approximately 48,000 suicides in USA in
2018, so this equates to a predicted
20% rise in suicides in the USA
Estimate of the association between unemployment
and suicide derived from person-based studies
investigating long-term unemployment and risk of
suicide; this may over-estimate association in the
context of economic recession
Unclear whether age specific suicide risks were
applied to the unemployment data – these were
not reported in meta-analysis and text of paper
contradictory
No account for potential impacts of pandemic other
than via unemployment rises

Pre-print, not peer reviewed.
Kawohl & Nordt, 2020 WorldPrevious research modelling the association
of unemployment with suicide in 63 countries
(2000–
2011).

International Labour Organisations (ILO) Predicted
job losses (March 2020) of between 5.3 to 24.7
million
Between 2135 and 9570 extra suicides per
year worldwide. i.e. a 0.3% to 1.2% rise
No account for potential impacts of pandemic other
than via unemployment rises
Duration of unemployment rises uncertain
Research letter, probably not peer reviewed.
McIntyre & Lee, 2020aUSAThe authors analysed theassociation of
unemployment with suicide in the USA (1999–2018)
and reported a 1% rise in unemployment was
associated with a 1% rise in suicide.

Three scenarios for changes in level of
unemployment a) unchanged at 3.6%(2020), 3.7%
(2021); b) rise to 5.8% (2020) and 9.3% (2021); c)
rise to 24% (2020) and 18% (2021).
Scenario b) associated with a 3.3% rise in
suicide in 2020–21
Scenario c) associated with an 8.4% rise in
suicide in 2020–21.
Usefully models the potential impact of two
different unemployment rate rises.

No account for potential impacts of pandemic other
than via unemployment rises
Duration of unemployment rises uncertain

Peer reviewed
McIntyre & Lee, 2020bCanadaThe authors analysed the association of
unemployment with suicide in Canada (2000–2018)
and reported a 1% rise in unemployment was
associated with a 1% rise in suicide.

Three scenarios for changes in level of
unemployment a) minimal change at 5.9%(2020),
6.0% (2021); b) rise to 8.3% (2020) and 8.1% (2021);
c) rise to 16.6% (2020) and 14.9% (2021).
Scenario b) associated with a 5.5% rise in
suicide in 2020–21
Scenario c) associated with a 27.7% rise in
suicide in 2020–21.
Usefully models the potential impact of two different
unemployment rate rises.

No account for potential impacts of pandemic other
than via unemployment rises
Duration of unemployment rises uncertain

Peer reviewed
Moser et al., 2020SwitzerlandUsed published data on increased risk of
suicide amongst a) prisoners in shared cells (3
fold increased risk) and b) prisoners in solitary
confinement (27 fold increased risk) as indicators
of risk of lock down on a) multi-person households
and; b) single person households.

Data on the annual number of suicides in
Switzerland and the proportion of Swiss people
living alone (16%) and in shared households (84%).
Estimate 1523 additional suicides.

Based on an estimate the 1043 recorded
suicides in Switzerland in 2017 this equates
to a more than doubling in suicides deaths
The team modelled the impact of COVID-19
pandemic on multiple outcomes as well as suicide.

Prison confinement is probably not a good proxy for
effects of lockdown. High suicide rates in prisoners
are due to multiple factors e.g. age and gender
profile; high levels of psychiatric morbidity rather
than impacts of confinement.
Other potential factors e.g. rises in unemployment
not included in models

Pre-print, not peer reviewed.

Table 5. Summary of studies assessing service utilisation.

AuthorsCountry /
region
Data usedOutcomeFindingsComment / Limitations
Capuzzi et al., 2020ItalyEmergency psychiatric evaluations at
psychiatric emergency rooms in two centres
in Lombardy, serving a population of approx.
850,000 in two equivalent periods pre (Fri 22
Feb 2019-Sun 5 May 2019) and following the
first COVID-19 case in Italy up to end of first
phase of lock-down (Fri 21 Feb 2020 to Sun
3rd May 2020). Data obtained from hospital
registers.
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
Period A (2019) 388 total attendances,
including 68 (17.5%) for self-harm/suicide
attempt
Period B (2020) 225 total attendances,
including 59 (26.2%) for self-harm/suicide
attempt.
Whilst absolute number of SH/SA cases
lower, the difference in number as a
proportion of total cases was somewhat
higher in age/sex adjusted models (aOR
1.48 (0.97 to 2.28)
Hospital based study from two
centres

Peer reviewed
Chen et al., 2020England, UKData obtained from Trust hospitals clinical
record systems.
People using or referred to inpatient
and community MH services (including
psychological therapy services) in Cambridge
and Peterborough - population approx
860,000.
Data for Liaison psychiatry referrals for
SH/Suicide attempt/ cover 11 March 2014 - 30
August 2020. Data also presented for suicidal
thoughts, but data were combined with “low
mood”
Intentional drug
overdose and
self-harm
A marked reduction (p<0.001) in liaison
psychiatry referrals for intentional drug
overdose, self-harm and suicidal thoughts
occurred after 23 March (lockdown).
The proportion of referrals returned to
pre-lockdown levels by May/June 2020.
Liaison team referral only (not all ED
attendances) at a single hospital.
Liaison psychiatry referral pathways
may have changed as a result of
COVID-19
No detailed demographic analysis of
referrals as the paper focused on a
wide range of mental and physical
health presentations. Single area in
England.

Peer reviewed
Dragovic et al., 2020AustraliaWestern Australia (WA) North Metropolitan
Health Services EDs were extracted from
the Emergency Department Data Collection
database. These 3 EDs serve a population
of approx. 800,000 persons. Attendances
over the period January to May 2020 were
compared to those that occurred over the
same calendar month periods during 2019.
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
7140 attendances (5522 persons) over the
two study periods.

Suicidal and self-harm presentation decreased
by 26% to previous year
Attendances at three hospitals but
WA has low population density
and went into stringent lockdown
early - hence findings may not be
generalisable to other Australian
states or other countries; routinely
collected healthcare data are large
and complete, but they lack rich
contextual detail.

Peer reviewed
Gonçalves-Pinho et al., 2021Portugal lPeople attending a Psychiatric Emergency
Department in a tertiary hospital in North
Portugal serving a population of approximately
3 million people.
Attendance between March 19th and May 2nd
2020 (when "emergency state" / restriction of
movement existed in Portugal in response to
COVID-19) compared with same dates in 2019
“Suicide
and self-
inflicted injury
presentations”
to psychiatric ED
Between March 19th and May 2nd 2020,
a significant reduction was identified in
presentations of “suicide and intentional
self-inflicted injury” to a metropolitan
psychiatric ED, compared to the same
period in 2019: N=36 v 81, a 55.6%
reduction.
Based on attendances at a single
hospital.

Unclear if codes include people with
suicidal thoughts as well as acts.

Peer reviewed
Hernández-Calle et al., 2020SpainElectronic health records examined at a major
general hospital in Madrid, Spain: November
2018 to April 2020.
Suicidal
thoughts
During March-April 2020, significantly
fewer psychiatric emergency department
visits due to suicidal ideation were
reported compared to the same period in
2019.
Data only shown in a graph.
Single centre study - findings may
have limited generalisability.

Peer reviewed
Hewson et al., 2020UK31 prisons in UK
Internal reports from Safer Custody Units
in 31 prisons where healthcare is provided
by CareUK (Russell Green, personal communication)
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
After lockdown there were fewer
implementations of Assessment, Care in
Custody and Teamwork (ACCT) processes;
to initiate care- plans for prisoners
considered at risk of self-harm or suicide.
Across the 31 prisons, there were 1079
ACCTs implemented in February 2020
compared to 828 in April 2020, a fall of just
under 25%. Analysis of data for 8 prisons
indicated that there were falls in incidents
of self-harm, decreasing by a third from
324 in February 2020 to 214 in April 2020.
No gender breakdown (female
prisoners in the UK generally have
much higher rates of self-harm than
male prisoners)
Unclear the basis of the selection of
the 8 prisons with self-harm data

Peer reviewed editorial
Jacob et al., 2020AustraliaSingle trauma centre in Australia, serving a
population of 1.5 million. Compared mean
number of trauma admissions during
March and April during years 2016 to 2020
Self-harmDuring March and April 2020 a significant
decrease in total number of trauma-
related admissions was observed, but
no significant difference in admissions
following self-harm was seen.
Mean no. of admissions examined
before and during the Covid-19
public health emergency.
Findings from a single centre may
not be generalisable. The study
was evidently under-powered for
examination of mean monthly self-
harm admissions.

Peer reviewed
Karakasi et al., 2020GreeceRecords of psychiatric emergency cases
presenting at the psychiatric emergency
department of AHEPA University General
Hospital of Thessaloniki during the following
equal time intervals: 1 March to 15-May 2019,
15November 2019 to 31 January 2020, 1
March to 15 May 2020.
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
During the restrictive measures in Greece
(March – May 2020), the number of
hospital presenting emergency psychiatric
incidents fell by half (p < 0.01). The number
of suicide attempts was higher in March-
May 2020 (n=7) compared to the same
period in 2019 (n= 5) and Nov 2019-Jan
2020 (n=4)
Data from a single hospital
Small numbers
Letter. Uncertain if peer-reviewed
Lersch, 2020USAEmergency calls (911) to Detroit Police
Department for services between 26th Feb
(first reported case COVID in city) and 27th
April 2020. Comparison with 2017–2019 and
also number of COVID-19 cases in the city.
Suicide threats
and suicides in
progress
In the time period of interest during the
pandemic in 2020, the number of 911 calls
for mental health issues was the lowest of
the 4 years (2017–2020), declining by 16%
from 2019 to 2020.
However, the number of calls for suicide
threats declined in 2020, while the number
of calls for suicides in progress remained
relatively stable over the 4-year period.
No significant correlations between daily
number of COVID-19 cases in the city
and the number of calls from mentally ill
persons, but as the number of COVID-19
cases increased there was a decline in calls
for suicides in progress, but a significant
inverse correlation between numbers of
COVID-19 cases and threats of suicide
calls (Pearson’s r=0.394) and a similar but
non-significant relationship with calls for
suicides in progress.
In local area analysis, “some of the
‘hotspots’ for suicide threats were in areas
of higher rates of COVID-19 cases”.
Interesting analysis by numbers
of COVID-19 cases, including by
locality.
Single city. Data are early and may
not be complete for COVID-19
cases.

Unclear if peer-reviewed
McAndrew et al., 2020IrelandElectronic health records for the emergency
department (ED) of a large teaching hospital in
Dublin were examined during the first 8 weeks
of the Covid-19 emergency (from 16th March
to 10th May 2020). Comparative data for 2018
and 2019 were also examined.
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm, Suicidal
thoughts
A 21% reduction in the frequency of
psychiatric emergency presentations
was observed, although the proportion
of presentations with suicidal ideation or
self-harm as factors remained unchanged.
The observed reduction was largely due
to a reduce attendance frequency during
'normal' hours.
Electronic health record studies are
not prone to selection or self-report
information biases.
Further research examining
patterns of emergency psychiatry
presentations during COVID-19
could identify risky / vulnerable
groups of people who have not
been seeking help during a crisis.
Similar studies from other countries
and with extended follow-up
periods are needed to build up a
comprehensive picture of these
temporal patterns.

Peer reviewed
McIntyre et al., 2020Ireland Self-harm referrals to Liaison Psychiatry team
in a single tertiary care hospital in Gallway
Ireland. Contrast 1 March 2020–31 May 2020
with the same period in 2017–2019
Self-harm
presentations
to a general
hospital.
Between March-April 2020, a significantly
lower proportion of self-harm
presentations (-35%) to the hospital was
reported, compared to the same period
for 2017–2019. At the end of May, similar
proportions of self-harm presentations
were reported compared to previous
years.
Single hospital study. Incidence
based on referrals to liaison
psychiatry - may under-estimate
total hospital presenting cases.
Liaison psychiatry referral pathways
may have changed as a result of
COVID-19.

Peer reviewed
Olding et al., 2021England, UKTrauma patients with penetrating injuries
who were treated at King's College Hospital
in London, 23rd March to 29th April 2020
compared to the same period in 2018 and
2019.
Self-harm (self-
inflicted injuries
Whilst the incidence of all types of
penetrating trauma appeared to have
fallen by 35% during the early lockdown
period), the number of self-harm episodes
increased from n=1 in 2018 to 5 in 2019
and 8 in 2020
Small, single site study. Crude
analytical approach. Number of self-
harm cases too small to draw any
strong conclusions

Peer reviewed
Pignon et al., 2020aFranceEmergency psychiatric consultations from
three psychiatric emergency centres from first
four weeks of lockdown (started March 17th
2020) and corresponding weeks 2019
Suicide
attempts
During the four first weeks of lockdown,
553 emergency psychiatric consultations
were carried out, less than half (45.2%) of
the corresponding weeks in 2019 (1224
consultations). Total suicide attempts
decreased in 2020 to 42.6% of those in
2019.
Peer reviewed publication now
published, Pignon et al., 2020b
Rajput et al., 2020England, UKTrauma admissions to a single level 1 trauma
centre in Liverpool using data from a trauma
research network database.
Compared three 7-week periods:
(1) Lockdown: 23 March 2020–10 May 2020)
(2) Pre-lockdown: 7 weeks prior to
lockdown (27 January 2020–15 March 2020)
(3) Pre-lockdown 2019: 7 week equivalent
period in 2019 (25 March 2019–12 May 2019)
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
Total trauma centre attendances fell
during lockdown: 2019: n=194; 7 weeks
pre lockdown 2020 n=173; during
lockdown n=121
Equivalent numbers for self-harm were:
20 (2019); 24 (pre-lockdown 2020); 14
(lockdown 2020): i.e. 30% fall vs 2019.
Small sample size; no assessment of
any change in socio-demographic
characteristics of self-harm;
possible changes due to service
re-configurations in response to
COVID.

Peer reviewed
Rhodes et al., 2020USATrauma registry data of attendees at a Level 1
trauma centre in S Carolina, USA
Jan 1-May 1 2019 compared to Jan 1 - May 1
2020 (lockdown April 8th – May 1st 2020).
Suicide
attempts and
self-harm,
including
specific
methods
Some evidence of rise in suicide attempts:
2019: 6 (0.6% of all presentations);
2020: 11 (1.4%) (p=0.079), including ‘self-
harm by jumping’: 2019: 0 (0%); 2020: 5
(0.6%); p=0.011).
No change in other ‘self-harm’
presentations: gun: 2019: 4 (0.4%); 2020:
4 (0.5%) (p=0.716); knife: 2019: 2 (0.2%);
2020: 1 (0.1%) (p=0.719), nor in acts of
‘Undetermined intent’: 2019: 18 (1.8%);
2020: 6 (0.8%) (p=0.064).
Most of the period studied (15 of
the 18 weeks) in 2020 preceded
lockdown. Small numbers and no
specific data on suicide attempts
during the post-lockdown period.
The statistical comparison of
suicide/SH episodes compared
these episodes as a % of total
attendances, rather than changes in
absolute numbers.

Peer reviewed
Sade et al., 2020Israel Pregnant women admitted to high risk
pregnancy units between 19 March 2020
and 26 May 2020 (the strict isolation period
of the pandemic) (n=90) compared to those
hospitalised to these units between November
2016 and April 2017 (n=279)
Suicidal
thoughts
assessed using
the Edinburgh
postnatal
depression
scale (EPDS)
Prevalence of suicidal thoughts was similar
pre (5.0%) vs during (8.6%) pandemic
(p = 0.221). OR in multivariable logistic
regression model, controlling for maternal
age, adjusted OR
1.8, 95% CI 0.71–4.85, p = 0.203.
Admission criteria may have
changed post pandemic (although
admissions per month similar ~
45/month
Relatively small sample
Select sample - pregnant women
- generalisability to wider population
uncertain.
Pre-pandemic data collected in Nov
2016-April 2017 - 3 years previously
- no account of any secular trends
(also seasonal difference in
collection period).

Peer reviewed
Sheridan et al., 2021USAEmergency department visits for mental
health issues to a single tertiary care pediatric
hospital in Portland, Oregon April 1 2019 up to
29 April 2020
Suicidal patientsDepartment dealt with 14108 patients in
2019.
16 suicidal patients seen in April 2020 vs.
46 in April 2020 (a 65% fall)
Before / after lock down
comparison, time trend analysis
Used routinely available data
Data on suicidal patients only specified
for 1 month.
One tertiary centre so not
generalisable.

Peer-reviewed
Smalley et al., 2021USAAttendees with suicidal thoughts and alcohol
issues across 20 diverse EDs in a large
Midwest integrated healthcare system with
>750,000 ED visits annually.
All behavioural health (BH) visits were collected
for 1-month (March 25th to April 24, 2020)
following “stay at home” orders (lockdown).
ICD-10 codes were used to identify visits
associated with suicidal thoughts. The same
parameters were used to collect data for the
same time period for 2019.
Suicidal
thoughts
ICD coded by
hospital staff
Comparing 2020 with the same period in
2019, there was 44.4% decrease in overall
ED visits and 28.0% decrease in BH visits.

Attendances of individuals with suicidal
thoughts decreased by 60.6% in 2020
(n=451) vs. 2019 (n=1144).

As a percentage of all ED attendances,
suicidal thoughts attendances decreased
from 2.03% in 2019 to 1.44% in 2020.
Alternative avenues for help-
seeking not included. But highlights
importance of improving access for
vulnerable populations during a
pandemic.
Included only one month in 2019
and one in 2020.

Letter to editor, probably not peer
reviewed
Titov et al., 2020AustralaCallers / website visits to "Mindspot" - national
digital MH service in Australia.
Compared caller volume and characteristics 1-
28 Sept 2019 (n=1650) vs. 19 March - 15 April
2020 (n=1668)
Suicidal
thoughts
question from
PHQ-9
No change in prevalence of: a) suicidal
thoughts (30.6% in September 2019 vs.
27.5% in March-April 2020; p=0.08), or b)
suicidal intentions or plans (3.7% v 2.9%
post p=0.27)
Clinical / helpline sample - not
population based.
Possible seasonal differences-
September contacts vs. March-April

Evidence of increased contact
volume to a digital service.

Peer reviewed
Walker et al., 2020USAED attendances (adult and pediatric) from
an integrated multiple hospital / ED system.
n=18 EDs across several states. Diagnoses via
electronic health records.
Pandemic period (17 March 2020 to 21 April
2020) compared to same period in 2019 (17
March 2019 to 21 April 2019) and 36 day pre-
pandemic period in 2020 (9 Feb 2020 to 16
March 2020)
Suicide
attempts/self-
harm
Total ED attendances fell by around 50%
during the period of "the broad institution
of distancing measures in response to the
COVID-19 pandemic".
Likewise, total ED attendances with
"suicide" diagnosis fell by around one third
during pandemic period:
17 March 2020 to 21 April 2020: n=36
(0.2% of total attendances) vs. 17 March
2019 to 21 April 2019: n=59 (0.2% total
attendances)
9 Feb 2020 to 16 March vs. 2020: n=64
(0.2% total)
Hospital presentations only

Only includes first 36 days of
distancing measures.

Peer reviewed

Table 6. Summary of studies assessing suicide rates.

AuthorsGeographyData usedConclusionsComments/Limitations
Acharya et al., 2020NepalNews reports of police data on suicides
in Nepal 2019–2020
April 2020-mid July 2020: 1233 suicide deaths
Feb-March 2020: 414 suicide deaths. Report 414
suicides /month pre-lockdown vs. 559/month after
lockdown (a 35% rise)
Paper uses newspaper reporting of police suicide
statistics as primary source of data, so may not be
reliable.

Letter to editor, probably not peer reviewed
Calderon-Anyosa & Kaufman, 2020PeruSuicide deaths reported by the Peruvian
National Death Information System
between 1st January 2017 and 28th June
2020.
Interrupted Time Series (ITS) analysis.

Suicide deaths fell sharply in males and females from
the start of the lockdown period (March 16 2020)
Authors used appropriate time series methods

Only 80% of all deaths are registered by the
Peruvian National Death Information System.

It is unclear whether cause of death assignment is
time-lagged in Peru.

Pre-print. Not peer reviewed
Isumi et al., 2020JapanSuicide statistics published by the
Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare for
children (aged <20 years)

Jan 2018-May 2020
Investigated the impact of school closures (March–
May 2020) by comparing these months with the
same period in 2018 and 2019 using Poisson
regression.

In 2018 and 2019, suicide rates tend to increase
from March to May; however, suicide rates from
March to May in 2020 appeared to decrease slightly.

Compared to March to May 2018 and 2019, no
strong evidence of an increase in suicide rates
during these months in 2020 (the school closure
period): Incidence rate ratio =1.15, (95% CI 0.81 to
1.64).
Analysis did not account for possible underlying
temporal trends in suicide using time-series
approaches.

Publicly available national statistics. Possibly
too short a timespan to assess impact on child
suicides. Suicides among children and adolescents
reportedly peak at the beginning of school
semesters in Japan, suicide rates may have
increased when school restarted in June 2020.

Peer reviewed
Pokhrel et al., 2021NepalNews reports of police data on suicides
in Nepal 2019–2020
Report a 25% rise in suicide deaths in the lockdown
period (after mid-March 2020) compared to pre-
lockdown. 1647 suicides between mid-March 2020
and 27 June 2020.
Data derived from newspaper reporting of police
suicide statistics as primary source of data, so may
not be reliable.

Letter, may not have been peer reviewed.
Poudel & Subedi, 2020;NepalNews reports of police data on suicides
in Nepal 2019–2020
Report a 20% rise in suicide deaths In the first month
of lockdown (from 24 March) (487 suicides vs. 410
in mid-February to mid-March 2020). Since the start
of lockdown up to 6 June, there were 1,227 suicides
(16.5/day) compared to 5,785 (15.8/day) in the same
period in 2019
Data derived from newspaper reporting of police
suicide statistics as primary source of data, so may
not be reliable.

Peer reviewed
Sakelliadis et al., 2020GreeceAutopsies carried out at the University
of Athens March 17th–April 15th 2019
vs. March 17th–April 15th 2020 (the first
month of lockdown
Total autopsies - 125 in 2019 ; 105 in 2020. The
number of suicides and undetermined deaths were
similar in 2019 vs. 2020: suicides: 6 (2019) vs 4
(2020); deaths of undetermined intent 4 (2019) vs. 5
(2020).
Small numbers of deaths.
Possible changes / delays in death investigation
during
COVID-19?

Peer reviewed
Singh et al., 2020NepalNews reports of police data on suicides
in Nepal 2019–2020
Suicide deaths rose by 20% in Nepal during period
of Covid-19. Within the first 74 days of lockdown on
average 16.5 people per day died by suicide vs. 15.8
per day in 2019
Paper uses newspaper reporting of police suicide
statistics as primary source of data, so may not be
reliable.
Letter, may not have been peer reviewed.
Tanaka & Okamoto, 2020JapanSuicide statistics (all ages) published
by the Ministry of Health, Labor and
Welfare.

July 2016 – June 2020
Compared Use Feb-Jun 2020 (COVID period) vs. and
Feb-Jun 2016–19 (pre-COVID).

Suicides fell by 13.5% (95% CI -17.5 to -9.5%) in the
COVID period. Decline is greatest in males and in
adults compared to children (<20 years) and older
people (>70 years). No evidence of an adverse effect
on students during school closure (rates fell).
Publicly available national statistics. The authors cite
the Japanese government’s "generous subsidies,
reduced working hours, and fewer school sessions"
as possible explanations for lack of adverse effect.

Pre-print. Not peer reviewed.
Ueda et al., 2021JapanSuicide statistics (all ages) published
by the Ministry of Health, Labor and
Welfare.

Jan 2017-August 2020
During the state of emergency (April-May 2020),
suicides declined by 20%.

By August suicide numbers were 7.7% higher than
the average for August 2016–19. The largest rises
were in females (mean of 532 suicides in August
2017–19 vs. 651 in 2020). Similar trajectories in all
age groups, but the largest rise was in those aged
<40 years (63% higher in 2020 vs 2017–19).
Groups of greatest concern: students (47% rise in
university student suicides August 2020 vs August
2017–19) and housekeepers.
Authors speculate greater rise in women could be
because they largely worked in the sectors most
affected by pandemic related closure (retail and
travel)

The analysis did not account for possible underlying
temporal trends in suicide using time-series
approaches.
the authors compare the percentage change in a
single month in 2020 vs figures for the same month
in 2017–19.

Pre-print. Not peer reviewed

Study populations

Sample sizes ranged from two individuals in a number of case series (Kapilan, 2020; Mamun et al., 2020b; Pirnia et al., 2020; Sahoo et al., 2020) to 60 million Twitter posts (Saha et al., 2020). Most studies included both male and female participants, except the studies reported by Wu et al. (2020a) and Sade et al. (2020) which were conducted in pregnant women.

Outcomes

Seven of the 24 case series (described in 25 papers) focused on a mix of outcomes including suicide attempts (n=2), suicide deaths (n=14) and suicidal thoughts (n=1). Of the 15 cross-sectional surveys five assessed suicidal thoughts alone, others collected data on various combinations of suicidal/self-harming behaviour or thoughts. A range of validated questionnairres were used to assess suicidal thoughts (Table 2). Five surveys used the single item from PHQ-9 ‘Have you had thoughts that you would be better off dead or of hurting yourself in some way’ over the last 2 weeks. Wang et al. (2020b) assessed responses to this question in a symptom network analysis.

Summary of study findings: Case series

We identified 24 case series of suicide attempts and suicide deaths (Table 1). Fourteen (58.3%) of these used news reports as their data source (Bhuiyan et al., 2020; Boshra & Islam, 2020; Dsouza et al., 2020; Griffiths & Mamun, 2020; Kapilan, 2020; Kar et al., 2020; Mamun & Ullah, 2020; Mamun et al., 2020a; Mamun et al., 2020b; Rahman & Plummer, 2020; Rajkumar, 2020; Shoib et al., 2020; Syed & Griffiths, 2020; Thakur & Jain, 2020) and are unlikely to be representative of general population suicide rates. Several overlap in terms of the information used, such as two letters to the editor about celebrity suicides in India (Kar et al., 2020; Mamun et al., 2020b), and many lack detailed information about the range of contributing factors. Whilst most case series focused on suicdes in the general population, some focussed on specific groups, such as psychiatric patients (e.g. Jolly et al., 2020), healthcare professions (e.g. Kapilan, 2020), patients with COVID-19 (e.g. Nalleballe et al., 2020), couple suicides (Griffiths & Manun, 2020) and alcohol-related deaths (e.g. Ahmed et al., 2020).

Many reasons for COVID-19 related suicide or suicide attempts were suggested in the case series with conclusions often derived from a journalist’s report of the death. Contributory factors reported included fear of contracting the disease or of passing it on to others, reactive psychoses, financial or economic issues, loneliness and isolation due to quarantine, stress among health professionals, the uncertainty around when the pandemic would end, misinterpretation of fever as COVID-19, contracting COVID-19, an inability for migrants to return home, frustration and the stigma of a (possibly perceived) positive result, which resulted in harassment or victimisation by others in the community. In the largest case series from India (n=72 suicide deaths), Dsouza et al. (2020) reported that the most commonly occurring antecedents to suicide were fear of infection (n=21) and financial crisis (n=19). Two studies reported specifically on the consequences of alcohol withdrawal due to lockdowns (Ahmed et al., 2020; Syed & Griffiths, 2020).

In the USA, four case reports described stressors for adolescents which include inability to see friends, arguments with parents, unresolvable misunderstandings over social media, academic stress, and feelings of isolation (Jolly et al., 2020). In a case series of adults across three hospitals in Doha, Qatar, three patients (out of 50 patients with COVID-19 receiving a psychiatric diagnosis) self-harmed as a reaction to the pandemic (Iqbal et al., 2020). A study of TriNetX records of people with COVID-19 (n=40,469) found that 0.2% (62 individuals) had suicidal thoughts recorded, although clinicians may not have systematically asked about suicidality (Nalleballe et al., 2020).

Summary of study findings: Cross-sectional surveys and cohort study

There were 13 articles describing cross-sectional surveys / cohort studies of two or more waves or one wave surveys where comparisons were explicitly made with appropriate pre-pandemic measures; or included comparative data between COVID-19 positive individuals and unaffected comparison individuals (Table 2). Six studies present repeat survey data, with measures recorded during, as well as before, the pandemic (Hamm et al., 2020; Hamza et al., 2021; Raifman et al., 2020; Winkler et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2020b; Zhang et al., 2020). Raifman et al. (2020) compared two nationally representative samples of US adults (one from 2017/18 and one from 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic) using different survey methodologies. They found that suicidal ideation had increased more than fourfold in low-income households, particularly in those with difficulty paying rent, job loss and loneliness. Similarly, Winkler et al. (2020) reported on a repeated, robustly-sampled, nationally representative survey in the Czech Republic using baseline data from 2017 and found that suicide risk, as measured by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, increased from 3.9% in November 2017 to 11.9% in May 2020. Both Raifman et al. (2020) and Winkler et al. (2020) used somewhat different data collection approaches before and during the pandemic. Two other studies from China (Wu et al., 2020b; Zhang et al., 2020) reported increases in relevant outcomes during the pandemic compared with before. The cohort study by Zhang et al. (2020) reported increases seen in nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), suicidal thoughts, suicidal plans, and suicide attempts in primary and secondary school children pre- compared with post-pandemic. Neither Hamm et al., 2020 (trial participants with depression aged >60years) nor Hamza et al., 2021 (students) found clear evidence of increased risk of suicidal ideation (older adults) or NSSI (students) during the pandemic.

Three additional articles, other than Raifman et al., 2020 and Winkler et al., 2020, reported cross-sectional surveys in the general population. Two of these used web based recruitment (Iob et al., 2020; Sueki & Ueda, 2020) with non-probability quota sampling or weighting, and one (Wang et al., 2020b) used a Chinese online platform providing functions similar to Qualtrics. Participants were COVID-19 patients in three studies (Wang et al., 2020a; Wu et al., 2020a; Zhao et al., 2020). Wang et al. (2020a) and Zhao et al. (2020) both reported higher levels of suicide-related outcomes in COVID-19 patients than general population (compared with the general population recruited through social media or from literature reports). In a general population sample that included people who reported having been diagnosed with COVID-19, Iob et al. (2020) found suicide/self-harm thoughts were more common in those with a COVID-19 diagnosis than in those not affected (33% vs 17%); likewise for suicide attempts (14% vs. 5%). Two surveys were conducted in university student populations (Debowska et al., 2020; Hamza et al., 2021) from 11 universities, with predominantly female respondents. No statistical evidence of a rise in suicidal thoughts or self-injury was found over a number of waves of data collection. Surveys were targeted at specific populations in a further three studies (Table 2): depressed patients (Hamm et al., 2020); pregnant women (Wu et al., 2020b); and school children (Zhang et al., 2020).

Summary of study findings: Social media platform posts

Two studies (Table 3) assessed posts on social media platforms, looking at Reddit (Low et al., 2020; 50% USA users) and Twitter in the USA (Saha et al., 2020). Both studies show marked increases in the proportion of postings related to suicidal thoughts and behaviours, and Low et al’s analysis of Reddit data identified a new cluster of posts about self-harm during the pandemic.

Summary of study findings: Modelling studies

We identified six studies (Table 4) that have used modelling approaches to forecast the potential impact of the pandemic on future suicide rates (Bhatia, 2020a; Bhatia, 2020b; Kawohl & Nordt, 2020; McIntyre & Lee, 2020a; McIntyre & Lee, 2020b; Moser et al., 2020). Three estimated the impact of the pandemic on suicide in the USA (Bhatia, 2020a; Bhatia, 2020b; McIntyre & Lee (2020a), while others assessed the impact on suicide in Canada (McIntyre & Lee, 2020b), Switzerland (Moser et al., 2020) and worldwide (Kawohl & Nordt, 2020).

The models suggest between a 1% rise (Kawohl & Nordt, 2020, globally) and a 145% rise (Moser et al., 2020, in Switzerland) in suicide deaths. Each was based on different assumptions, but the models largely focused on the well-characterised impact on suicide rates of periods of economic recession and rises in unemployment (Chang et al., 2013; Stuckler et al., 2009). Unemployment rates are predicted to rise as a result of a post-pandemic recession, due to measures to control the spread of the virus on the wider economy and loss of work as many businesses have been forced to shut down.

Only one study modelled the effects of physical distancing measures on suicide rates (Moser et al., 2020); it did this by using suicide rates in prisoners in group or single cells as a model for lockdown in a group or in isolation. The prison population is exposed to multiple other risk factors for suicide (e.g. increased prevalence of mental illness, substance misuse and low socioeconomic position) (Humber et al., 2011; Rivlin et al., 2010), and this, coupled with the distinct differences between prison incarceration and the adoption of home quarantine procedures during the pandemic, means this model is likely to overestimate the potential impact of physical distancing measures on suicide risk in the general population.

Summary of studies’ findings: Service utilisation studies

We identified 20 service utilisation studies. Four of these addressed the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal thoughts only, thirteen included suicide attempts and/or self-harm, one suicidal thoughts, attempts and self-harm (McAndrew et al., 2020), one suicide threats and suicides in progress (Lersch, 2020), while in one the precise nature of the suicidal outcome was unclear (Sheridan et al., 2021) (Table 5). Most studies were conducted in the US (5) and the UK (4), three in Australia, two in Ireland and one study in each of the following countries: France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Portugal, and Spain.

Across the studies focusing on suicidal thoughts, the methodologies varied from studies of presentations to health/mental health services to callers/visits to a website, with wide-ranging sample sizes, from 1668 (Titov et al., 2020) to 90 (Sade et al., 2020); the latter including a specific sample of pregnant women. The studies showed either a reduction (Chen et al., 2020; Hernandez-Calle et al., 2020; Smalley et al., 2021) or no change (Sade et al., 2020; Titov et al., 2020) in presentations to health/mental health services or self-reported suicidal thoughts, with the majority making comparisons to the same time in 2019. The eleven studies examining the impact of COVID-19 on self-harm/suicide attempts used a variety of methodologies, including accessing data from health/mental health services, trauma registries, community-based services, emergency call services and the prison service. Where reported, the sample sizes ranged from 18,646 (Walker et al., 2020) to 30 (Olding et al., 2021). Eight studies reported a decrease in self-harm/suicide attempts during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic (Capuzzi et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Goncalves-Pinho et al., 2021; Hewson et al., 2020; McIntyre et al., 2020; Pignon et al., 2020a; Rajput et al., 2020; Walker et al., 2020). In two of these studies – both with somewhat longer post lockdown follow-up periods of 3–5 months (Chen et al., 2020; McIntyre et al., 2020) – presentations had returned to pre-lockdown levels by the end of follow-up. Three studies reported an increase in self-harm / suicide attempts (Karakasi et al., 2020; Olding et al., 2021; Rhodes et al., 2020).

Pignon et al. (2020a) reported a 54.8% decrease in overall psychiatric emergency consultations and a 42.6% decrease in self-harm/suicide attempts during the first 4 weeks of the lockdown in France compared with the same period in 2019. Likewise, Gonçalves-Pinho et al. (2021) identified a 55.6% decrease in presentations of “suicide and intentional self-inflicted injury” to a metropolitan psychiatric emergency department in Portugal in the period 19th March to 2nd May between 2019 and 2020. McIntyre et al. (2020) reported a 35% reduction in self-harm presentations to a general hospital in March-April 2020 in Ireland compared with the same period in 2017–2019; however presentations returned to pre-pandemic levels by the end of May. Another study in Ireland (Mcandrew et al., 2020) also reported a reduction in psychiatric emergency presentations to the emergency department but no change in the proportion of presentations with suicidal thoughts or self-harm. In a study conducted by Hewson et al. (2020) in 31 prisons in the UK between February and April 2020, self-harm incidents decreased by one third between February and April 2020.

In contrast, whilst Olding et al. (2021) reported a reduction in the incidence of all types of penetrating trauma presenting to a UK hospital during the early period of lockdown, the number of self-harm presentations increased slightly (albeit on the basis of very low event counts). A similar pattern was identified by Karakasi et al. (2020) in Greece, where between March and May 2020 a significant reduction was observed in individuals presenting as emergencies at hospital for psychiatric examination (the number of presentations for suicide attempts was 7 compared with 5 in the same period in 2019). Capuzzi et al. (2020) reported a rise in self-harm / suicide attempts as a proportion of total emergency department presentations in Italy, but this rise in the proportion of cases was in the context of falls in the absolute numbers of cases, set against reductions in total emergency department attendances.

A study of emergency police calls in Detroit, USA, (Lersch, 2020) showed that the number of general mental health calls declined after the onset of the pandemic in that city, while calls relating to suicides in progress remained relatively stable over the 4 year period. Calls involving suicide threats declined inversely to the increase in COVID-19 infections, although the authors noted some ‘hotspots’ within the city for both infection rates and suicide threats. A study of 31 prisons in the UK found that after lockdown there were fewer implementations of Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork (ACCT) processes to initiate care- plans for prisoners considered at risk of self-harm or suicide (Hewson et al., 2020).

Summary of study findings: impact of COVID-19 on suicide rates

Nine reports, based on data from four countries – Greece, Japan, Nepal and Peru – describe changes in suicide rates in relation to the onset of COVID-19 and national lockdowns. A challenge with interpreting all the reports is the uncertainty over the extent to which official recording of suicides may have been affected by disruptions in death investigation and reporting due to COVID-19, although this is more likely to lead to under-estimation than over-estimation of suicide rates. Only one of the studies (Calderon-Anyosa & Kaufman, 2020) used appropriate time series to take account of underlying temporal trends in suicide when comparing the COVID-19 period with earlier years/months.

The four reports from Nepal (Acharya et al., 2020; Pokhrel et al., 2021; Poudel & Subedi, 2020; Singh et al., 2020) were all based on news reports of police data on suicides, rather than on data obtained directly from Nepalese authorities and did not describe the strengths and weakness of the police data. They report between a 20% (Poudel & Subedi, 2020) and 35% (Acharya et al., 2020) rise in suicide in the first 3 months after lockdown compared with either preceding months or a similar period the previous year. These are marked rises, but without longer time series data it is not possible to determine the extent to which these were COVID-19 related or a possible continuation of pre-existing adverse trends. Three reports, based on Japan’s timely national suicide statistics, describe recent trends in Japanese suicide rates (Tanaka & Okamoto, 2020 pre-print, Tanaka & Okamoto, 2021, final version; Isumi et al., 2020; Ueda et al., 2021). The most recent of these, using data up to October 2020, indicate that 14% falls in Japanese suicides in the early months of the pandemic (Feb-June 2020), were reversed during the second outbreak (July to October, 2020) increasing by 16% (Tanaka & Okamoto, 2021). Increases in suicide rates were higher in females (especially housewives) and children and adolescents. Similarly compared with August in 2017–19, figures for August 2020 were increased by 7.7%, with rises particularly in females and people aged <40 years (Ueda et al., 2021). An early report (data up to May 2020) provided some reassurance about the impact of public health measures/school closures on suicide rates in children (<20 years) in Japan (Isumi et al., 2020). However, more recent data (Ueda et al., 2021) flags a concerning rise amongst students and young (<40 years) people, particularly females. The numbers of deaths in the autopsy study from Athens (Sakelliadis et al., 2020) is too small to reach any conclusion about the impact on suicide in Greece. Calderon-Anyosa & Kaufman’s (2020) study of suicide in Peru is reassuring, though details of potential impacts of COVID-19 on death registration in Peru are not provided.

Other studies

The three other studies investigated various risk groups, using case control and mixed methods approaches. Son et al. (2020) interviewed students from a single US university about the impacts of the pandemic on their mental health; some students described suicidal thoughts and the challenges they faced, one linked suicidal thoughts to being confined at home with their family and another to study-related difficulties. Cai et al. (2020) compared suicidal thoughts in Chinese medical workers dealing with COVID-19 patients and those not in contact with such patients. They found no evidence of increased levels of suicidal thoughts amongst those in contact with COVID patients. Lastly, Evans et al. (2020) studied the pandemic-related stresses felt by Australian families in free text responses to a questionnaire. One respondent, a father with three children described the extreme financial distress they faced with “our three businesses closing, we are eligible for none of the government support due to a tax debt and are looking at bankruptcy and selling our home as the only option. Both of us have had thoughts of suicide" (Quote from father of 3 children). (Evans et al., 2020)

Discussion

Seventy-eight articles were included in this review, 49 more than in our review of studies published up to 7th June 2020. All were based on observational studies. The majority of studies were case series or service utilisation studies from across the world. No studies were based on populations from sub-saharan Africa. Almost half of the articles did not appear to have been peer-reviewed, consisting mainly of pre-prints published before peer review, or research letters that may not have been peer-reviewed. In contrast to the last update (John et al., 2020c) in which no studies reported on the change in incidence of suicide or suicidal behaviour after the onset of the pandemic compared with beforehand, we identified nine papers in this update, presenting data on studies from four countries which investigated the impact of COVID-19 on suicide rates. To date, the highest quality data come from Japan which utilises suicide records covering the entire population; these data indicate that the impact of COVID-19 on suicides rates may change over time and have varying effects on different sections of the population. Analysis of data from Peru used appropriate analytic techniques and reported a fall in suicides following the onset of the pandemic during the months March to September (Calderon-Anyosa & Kaufman, 2020). Methodological limitations and the availability of data for only four countries limit our ability to assess the early impact of COVID-19 on suicide rates in this update.

Evidence published following our cut-off date for inclusion in this iteration of the review indicates there was no rise in suicide rates in the early months of the pandemic in high income countries (John et al., 2020a). Since our 19th October search, a further 13 studies analysing suicide trends in ten countries or regions within countries (Australia, Austria, Germany, Greece, Japan; Korea, Norway, Sweden, Thailand and the USA) have been published (Ando & Furuichi, 2020; Bray et al., 2021: Deisenhammer & Kemmler, 2021; Faust et al., 2020; Karakasi et al., 2021; Ketphan et al., 2020; Kim, 2021; Leske et al., 2021; Mitchell & Li, 2021; Qin & Mehlum, 2021; Radeloff et al., 2020 and Radeloff et al., 2021; Rück et al., 2020; Vandoros et al., 2020). Four of these use appropriate time-series modelling approaches to control for underlying trends (Leske et al., 2021, Australia; Faust et al., 2020, USA; Vandoros et al., 2020, Greece; Ando & Furuichi, 2020, Japan) – these report either no change or a fall in suicide deaths in the early months of the pandemic, although in keeping with Tanaka & Okamoto (2020); Tanaka & Okamoto (2021) and Ueda et al.’s (2021) analysis for Japan, Ando & Furuichi (2020) report a rise in suicides in Japan since July associated with increased unemployment . In keeping with concerns from Nepal, data from Thailand’s Department of Mental Health indicate suicide numbers have risen during the pandemic (Ketphan et al., 2020). Data from Connecticut, USA on suicides during the 10 weeks of stringent lockdown measures in the state indicate that whilst suicide rates fell during this period, the proportion of suicides amongst minority ethnic groups rose, highlighting the possibility that the pandemic may be having a disproportionately greater adverse impact on minority groups (Mitchell & Li., 2021). A concern supported by a recent analysis from Maryland, USA. (Bray et al., 2021).

The majority of the 13 included cross-sectional surveys were subject to methodological flaws in sampling methods and use of validated instruments. Nonetheless, there is evidence from at least three countries (China, Czech Republic and USA) of increases in suicidal/self-harm thoughts in the general population during the pandemic compared with pre-pandemic levels. Two robustly sampled general population, nationally representative cross-sectional surveys with pre pandemic baseline data from 2017/18 reported a three to four fold increase in suicide risk (Winkler et al., 2020) and suicidal thoughts in low-income households (Raifman et al., 2020), but differences in data collection approaches (i.e. face-to-face vs. on-line) may bias comparisons. Recent studies, with repeat measures of mental health outcomes since the start of the pandemic, also point to rising levels of suicidal thoughts during the pandemic (O’Connor et al., 2020).

The review included 20 service utilisation studies (compared with only three in the previous update), the majority of which identified a drop in frequency of emergency department contacts for suicidal thoughts, behaviours and self-harm. An increase in contacts to a mental health digital platform was identified in one study (Titov et al., 2020), but with no changes in contacts for suicidal thoughts. There have been several recently published service utilisation studies (Carr et al., 2021; Hawton et al., 2020a; Jollant et al., 2021) which reiterate and extend these findings. Jollant et al. (2021) report a 8.5% decrease in hospitalisation for self-harm, greater in females than males, in France in January to August 2020 compared with the same period in 2019. There was also an increase in use of some more lethal methods (firearms / jumping/ drowning) as well as a rise in in-hospital deaths and ITU admissions. Carr et al. (2021) report a 30% fall in consultations for self-harm in April to June 2020 in primary care and secondary care in the UK, the former a setting not explored in currently included studies. They highlight that the treatment gap for depression and anxiety was greater in working age adults, for practice populations in deprived areas, and for self-harm. A limitation of all studies based on hospital presentations is that they may not reflect community prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviours. This may be a particular issue if people were deterred from presenting to hospital because of fears of either over-burdening already stretched healthcare systems or of contracting the virus in these settings themselves. That said, those who present to services may be able to give some insight into whether COVID-19-related concerns are important. In one UK study, ‘stay-at-home’ related issues contributed to around half of cases, more so in males than females. The most frequent COVID-related factors were mental health issues, including new and worsening disorders, cessation, reduction or transformation of services (including absence of face-to-face support), isolation and loneliness, reduced contact with key individuals, disruption to normal routine, and entrapment (Hawton et al., 2020b).

Modelling studies that aimed to predict the impact of the pandemic on national or global suicide rates produced widely differing estimates of the likely impact and most focused on predictions based on previous studies of the impact of changes in unemployment levels on suicide. These differences between model estimates were partly due to differences in modelling assumptions, which are themselves in turn associated with considerable uncertainty. Given the methodological limitations, the uncertainty of assumptions about how the economies of individual countries will be affected, as well as international differences in financial supports given to businesses and people out of work, these predictive exercises can at best only provide a guide as to where action and available suicide prevention strategies should be directed.

Studies of social media posts potentially provide another insight into the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide risk and have the potential to provide more-or-less real time assessments of changes in risk. The two studies we identified (Low et al., 2020; Saha et al., 2020) reported heightened levels of suicide-related posting/suicidality. However, there are several limitations to this approach making these studies hard to interpret, including: self-selecting biases in respect of who contributes to these fora (and when); the unit of analysis being posts/tweets rather than individuals so multiple posts may be from the same individual; and the dissemination of misinformation; the demographic and clinical characteristics of the people making the posts are unknown; and whether comments reflect their own distress or more general concerns is uncertain.

It is also not clear whether mentions of suicide on social media posts map to actual rates of suicidal thoughts in the community and whether this changes in particular contexts and over time. The nature of the relationship (if any) between social media reports and behavioural change in the context of suicide needs to be better understood. Insights derived from such approaches may help deepen our understanding of the mental health challenges of the pandemic and how these may change over time. Future research could usefully try to segment the posts by individuals and sociodemographics to explore changes in sub-groups. Another potentially useful approach to assessing the impact on COVID-19 on population mental health and suicide risk is analysis of Google trends data (Jacobsen et al., 2020; Knipe et al., 2020; Rana, 2020; Sinyor et al., 2020), but we excluded such studies from our review as we think that search data constitute an even weaker proxy for population mental health.

We identified 25 case series of suicide attempts and suicide deaths, 14 based on news stories in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Given the relatively low quality of case series in the hierarchy of evidence, often reflecting small numbers and selection bias, but more importantly the lack of comparator data, drawing any reliable inferences from these studies is inherently flawed. Furthermore, news reports report a non-representative sample of suicide deaths and often derive their information from bystanders and witnesses who are unlikely to know the full circumstances of the death (Khan et al., 2009). However, in parts of the world without reliable suicide incidence data they may be the only source of information (Khan & Hyder, 2006). Nevertheless, these studies highlight circumstances surrounding apparently COVID-19-related suicides and flag the potential importance of factors such as economic difficulties, fear of the disease, alcohol withdrawal and social isolation even in young people and children.

Only 14% (11/78) included studies specifically focussed on children and young people. An early report (data up to May 2020) provided some reassurance about the impact of public health measures/school closures on suicide rates in children (<20 years) in Japan (Isumi et al., 2020). However, more recent data (Tanaka & Okamoto, 2021; Ueda et al., 2021) flags a concerning rise amongst students and young ((<40 years) people, particularly females and children and adolescents during the second wave of the pandemic and school closure. Three were cross-sectional surveys with attendant methodological flaws. Two surveys were conducted in university student populations (Debowska et al., 2020; Hamza et al., 2021) in 11 universities with predominantly female respondents. No statistical evidence of a rise in suicidal thoughts or self-injury was found over a number of waves of data collection. Wang et al’s (2020b) network analysis of symptoms of anxiety and depression in young people highlighted an increasing connection between ‘too much worry’ and suicidal thoughts. It is challenging to assess how generalisable these findings from China are to other countries and other phases of the pandemic. If generalisable, it could point to some treatment targets that are more central to suicide risk, but this is not yet clear. Zhang et al’s (2020) cohort study reported pre-pandemic comparison data, with increases seen in NSSI, suicidal thoughts, suicidal plans and suicide attempts in primary and secondary school children post-pandemic. However the sampling frame was poorly reported so representativeness of the sample is challenging to assess. Only one of the service utilisation studies focussed on this age group (Sheridan et al., 2021) but this was based in a single tertiary centre; although another study of a broader age range included them (Walker et al., 2020). There were two case series focussed on children and young people (Jefsen et al., 2020b; Jolly et al., 2020). The stressors identified for adolescents included the inability to see friends, arguments with parents, unresolvable arguments via social media, academic stress and feelings of isolation (Jolly et al., 2020).

Only three included studies focussed on frontline healthcare staff. Two were case series (Kapilan, 2020; Rahman & Plummer, 2020) based on news reports of six or eight nurses deaths (i.e. there is potential duplication of reports of the same deaths). Factors reported as associated with deaths included: fear they had become infected; positive test result; being in quarantine; fearful of becoming infected; and “ extreme stress and mental disturbance”. The third, a case control study, reported that the prevalence of suicidal thoughts was no higher in medical staff who were in direct contact with COVID-19 patients, compared to those who had no direct contact (Cai et al., 2020).

Strengths and limitations

The literature exploring COVID-19 and suicide deaths, suicidal behaviours, self-harm and suicidal thoughts is expanding rapidly. Since our last review end-date (i.e. between 7th June 2020 to 19th October 2020) we identified a further 4156 potentially eligible studies. While most of the published evidence that we identified in this update had important limitations there was a marked improvement in study quality compared with our last update. Importantly, a large volume of the literature remains not peer reviewed; some reports are pre-prints, so this may change, but a number are research letters. All included studies remain observational in design and thus potentially prone to multiple sources of bias (e.g., recall bias, selection bias, confounding).

A number of the studies included in this update used non-probability samples e.g. convenience samples of volunteers recruited via the Internet. Such studies tend to attract volunteers who have access to the internet, are already engaged in research or have an interest in the topic. When assessing suicidal thoughts and behaviours, those in most distress or with co-existing mental illness, as well as older people, may be less likely to participate. Therefore prevalence estimates and associations observed among healthy volunteers may not reflect associations that would be seen in representative samples (Pierce et al., 2020). However, such study designs potentially provide potentially valuable information at the very early stages of a health crisis, where the timeliness of studies to inform policy and practice is important and repeated cross sectional studies provide valuable evidence about changing levels of population mental health and risk factors (e.g. O’Connor et al., 2020; Raifman et al., 2020). More consistent reporting of sampling frames, repeat survey and the use of validated measures will ensure they make a more meaningful contribution to the evidence base.

There is a paucity of research focussing or reporting on ethnic minorities within populations, children and young people, the bereaved and frontline health and social care staff, which needs to be addressed. Synthesis of findings across studies, and both between and within countries, is confounded by the timing of data collection; differences between studies may be due not only to methodological differences, but also differences in the extent and stringency of public health prevention measures (physical distancing), economic disruption and COVID-19 infection rates in the any population at the time data are collected. A final limitation of the review is that, due to resource limitations, we excluded grey literature (e.g. Fancourt & Steptoe, 2020; National Child Mortality Database, 2020)

Implications

There is thus far no clear evidence of an increase in suicidal behaviour or self-harm associated with the pandemic, nor with the measures taken to curb the spread of COVID-19, although signals from some repeated population surveys and suicide trend data from Nepal and Japan are concerning. There are suggestions of increased risk in people who have been infected with COVID-19, in line with findings from studies showing increased risk of mental health problems in survivors of COVID-19 (Taquet et al., 2021). Declines in levels of hospital presentation for suicidal behaviour may reflect a real decline in suicidal behaviours early in the pandemic perhaps due to the recognised impact of periods of acute stress / national crisis (e.g. wars) on suicide rates or unmet need in the community, with people cautious about overburdening clinical services or of their own risk of contracting COVID-19 (John et al., 2020a). There is a relative lack of high quality studies to inform prevention in Low and Middle Income Countries and in disadvantaged groups, although studies point to an emerging risk in the latter (Mitchell & Li., 2021). There are, as yet, no studies that assess the effectiveness of strategies to reduce the risk of suicide deaths, suicidal behaviours, self-harm and suicidal thoughts, resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic; such research is urgently required.

Our living review provides a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on risk of suicidality. However, the rapid growth of research in this area necessarily makes the reporting of the large volume of included studies brief. Therefore in the future we plan to publish timely updates focussed on specific topics like suicide rates, for instance, or in specific populations such as children and adolescents, those with confirmed COVID-19 or healthcare workers. Our future updates will also focus on studies investigating suicide deaths, suicide attempts and self-harm. We will no longer include studies: with suicidal thoughts and “suicide risk” as outcomes; modelling studies (since these have been superseded by studies based on suicide deaths) and those based on social media posts (because of the lack of evidence for diagnoses and self-selecting biases in respect of who contributes to these).

Dissemination of information

This living review, along with further updates, will be published via F1000Research. This review was registered on PROSPERO, with ID CRD42020183326. The protocol is available. All further data are publicly available via our Harvard Dataverse repository including all results of the continuous evidence surveillance and screening. Findings from the review will be widely disseminated through conference presentations, policy briefings, peer-reviewed publications, a project website (https://covid19-suicide-lsr.info/), and traditional and social media outlets.

Study status

We are currently searching and screening on a daily basis.

Ethics and dissemination

Since this is a systematic review, ethical approval is not required.

Data availability

Underlying data

Harvard Dataverse: Full review data for: "The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review". https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/7WZXZK (John & Schmidt, 2020)

This project contains the following underlying data:

  • - Screening_snapshot.csv (Screening progress for literature published before June 7th)

Extended data

Harvard Dataverse: Full review data for: "The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review". https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/7WZXZK (John & Schmidt, 2020)

This project contains the following extended data:

  • LSR update tables and figures.docx (Tables and figures from this publication)

  • PRISMA.doc

Data regarding the Protocol are available via our Harvard Dataverse repository for the protocol

Harvard Dataverse: Underlying data for: The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on suicidal behaviour: a living systematic review protocol. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/9JYHLS (John et al., 2020b)

That project contains the following extended data:

  • Search.docx (additional information about the searches, including full search strategies)

  • Data extraction sheet/ study report

  • Figure 1

  • Prisma.pdf (the PRISMA-P statement)

  • Prospero registration

Reporting guidelines

Harvard Dataverse: PRISMA checklist for ‘The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: a living systematic review’ https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/7WZXZK (John & Schmidt, 2020)

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

Software availability

The development version of the software for automated searching is available from Github: https://github.com/mcguinlu/COVID_suicide_living.

Archived source code at time of publication: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3871366 (McGuinness & Schmidt, 2020)

License: MIT

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 04 Sep 2020
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
John A, Eyles E, Webb RT et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] F1000Research 2021, 9:1097 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.25522.2)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 04 Sep 2020
Views
72
Cite
Reviewer Report 08 Feb 2021
Gonzalo Martinez-Ales, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 72
This manuscript is a great scientific contribution. The main strength of the manuscript (that it builds on a remarkable effort -- their living systematic review) goes hand in hand with the most important limitation (the period included in the particular ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Martinez-Ales G. Reviewer Report For: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2021, 9:1097 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.28166.r77902)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
74
Cite
Reviewer Report 11 Jan 2021
Kimberly A Van Orden, Department of Psychiatry, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 74
This article provides a review of empirical studies on suicide ideation, behavior, and deaths as related to the COVID-19 pandemic (up to June 2020). Given prior data linking disasters and crises more generally, and pandemics specifically, to changes in suicide ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Van Orden KA. Reviewer Report For: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2021, 9:1097 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.28166.r75857)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
52
Cite
Reviewer Report 22 Sep 2020
Lakshmi Vijayakumar, Department of Psychiatry, VHS SNEHA (Suicide Prevention Agency), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India 
Approved
VIEWS 52
  • This is a much needed study during the pandemic which is constantly evolving with many ramifications.
     
  • In the category of what are the effects of other exposures, suicide by railways can be
... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Vijayakumar L. Reviewer Report For: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and suicidal behaviour: update of living systematic review [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2021, 9:1097 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.28166.r71350)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 04 Sep 2020
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.