Research Information System
International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP), Vienna, Austria, 10 - 13 June 2025, pp.304, (Summary Text)
Background: Gender plays a crucial role in suicide worldwide. While common risk factors like unemployment are well-documented (Berkelmans et al., 2021), the gender paradox (Canetto & Sakinofsky, 1998) persists - women attempt suicide more often, men face higher suicide fatality (Miranda-Mendizabal et al., 2019). Gender shapes help-seeking behaviors (Schrijvers et al., 2012), contributing to the paradox maintenance. Suicide remains the third leading cause of death in young adulthood (WHO, 2024), which brings new developmental challenges and vulnerabilities (Auerbach et al., 2016; Duffy et al., 2019). Particularly university students, show high suicidal ideation (Chesin & Jeglic, 2022) and attempts (Sheldon et al., 2021), underscoring the need for targeted interventions.
Gender-sensitive mental health addresses how gender affects different aspects of life, and includes this understanding at every stage of care (Judd et al., 2009). To prevent suicide effectively, interventions should integrate this perspective. Therefore, this study explores how existing psychological interventions for university students include gender sensitivity, asking: Are psychological interventions for suicide prevention among university students gender-sensitive?
databases (e.g., EBSCO, Web of Science) were searched without date restrictions. Quantitative/qualitative peer-reviewed articles/theses written in English detailing interventions utilized to prevent suicide in university students were included. Exclusions applied to non-academic publications, non-student populations, and studies lacking intervention details or suicide measures. Data was extracted following the Cochrane Collaboration checklist (Higgins & Green, 2008), with additional attention to gender sensitivity.
Result: Of 6.730 studies, 151 were identified for full-text screening after eliminating duplicates and title/abstract screening, and 26 met inclusion criteria. Notably, only 3 studies addressed gender-sensitivity. One study focused on a cognitive-behavioral and interpersonal group intervention for Korean female students (Kim et al., 2011). Another examined a stress management group intervention for Korean male students (Kim et al., 2016). The third explored a person-centered group intervention using bibliotherapy for suicide prevention among gay undergraduate students, tackling masculinity, heterosexism, and harassment (Perryman, 2011). Crucially, no studies discussed how to adapt non-gender-sensitive interventions to individuals' genders.
Discussion: This systematic review highlights an important gap in gender-sensitive suicide intervention. Notably, most studies were from Korea, suggesting that gender may have greater effects on suicidality in cultures with stricter gender roles. Lastly, the intersection of gender and other disadvantages can elevate suicide risk through multiple discrimination.