3.8 Review

Forms of Self-immolation in Iran: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

出版社

KOWSAR PUBL
DOI: 10.5812/ijpbs.83774

关键词

Burns; Iran; Meta-analysis; Suicides; Systematic Review

资金

  1. Ilam University of Medical Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Self-immolation is a violent form of suicide and a psychosocial issue. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to investigate self-immolation in Iran, showing a mortality rate of 64%, with oil being the most common method and winter being the peak season for incidents. Meta-regression found no significant correlation between self-immolation mortality and year of study.
Context: Self-immolation is one of the most violent methods of suicide and is considered a psychosocial problem. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the forms of self-immolation in Iran using a systematic review and meta-analysis method. Data Sources: In this study, seven papers published from 1999 to January 2020 were selected using keywords such as self-immolation and Iran in SID, Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science (ISI), Scopus, and Elsevier databases. Study Selection: Study selection was done by two independent researchers. The results of studies were pooled using the Freeman-Tukey Double Arcsine Transformation method. The heterogeneity among studies was checked using the Q-test and I-2 index. Data Extraction: Data were extracted using a data extraction form. Results: The total sample size was 9,470. The mortality rate in self-immolation subjects was estimated at 64% (95% CI: 0.56 - 0.73). The most important means of self-immolation was oil [89% (95% CI: 82% - 96%). Winter had the highest numbers of self-immolation [29% (95% CI: 22% - 37%). Meta-regression showed no significant correlation between the mortality of self-immolation and the year of study. Conclusions: To reduce self-immolation, easy access to oil must be restricted in families, and high-risk people should have access to psychology consultation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据