4.3 Article

Twelve-month prevalence and predictors of self-reported suicidal ideation and suicide attempt among Korean adolescents in a web-based nationwide survey

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0004867414540752

关键词

Adolescent; Korea; prevalence; risk factor; suicide

资金

  1. National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA) [NB2012-008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The suicide rate in South Korea was the highest among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in 2011. Although the suicide rate in adolescents is lower than that of adults and is reported to be decreasing in young males in some countries, it has consistently increased in recent years in South Korea. We aimed to determine the prevalence, pattern, and predictors of suicidal ideation and attempt in the past 12 months. Methods: A total sample of 72,623 adolescents aged 12-18 years who responded to a web-based anonymous self-reported survey between September and October 2010 was used for the analysis. Results: The suicidal ideation and suicide attempt rates were 19.1% and 4.9%, respectively. Being female, having a poor perceived socioeconomic status and a poor perceived academic performance, subjective feelings of depression, cigarette smoking, alcohol use, perceived general medical health, and experiences of any involvement with sexual intercourse were the contributing factors that predicted elevated risks for suicidal ideation and suicide attempt. In contrast to previous reports in other countries, the suicide attempt rate in Korean female adolescents peaked at age 13 years, and there were no differences in suicidal ideation in females by age. There were no differences in both suicidal ideation and attempt rates in males by age. Conclusion: A multidisciplinary approach that takes into consideration the characteristics of Korean adolescents with suicidal ideation or suicide attempt is warranted for developing prevention and treatment programs.

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

4.3
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