Last updated: 2020-06-02
Checks: 1 1
This reproducible R Markdown analysis was created with workflowr (version 1.6.2). The Checks tab describes the reproducibility checks that were applied when the results were created. The Past versions tab lists the development history.
The R Markdown file has unstaged changes. To know which version of the R Markdown file created these results, you’ll want to first commit it to the Git repo. If you’re still working on the analysis, you can ignore this warning. When you’re finished, you can run
wflow_publish to commit the R Markdown file and build the HTML.
Great! You are using Git for version control. Tracking code development and connecting the code version to the results is critical for reproducibility.
The results in this page were generated with repository version fa2a72f. See the Past versions tab to see a history of the changes made to the R Markdown and HTML files.
Note that you need to be careful to ensure that all relevant files for the analysis have been committed to Git prior to generating the results (you can use
wflow_git_commit). workflowr only checks the R Markdown file, but you know if there are other scripts or data files that it depends on. Below is the status of the Git repository when the results were generated:
working directory clean
Note that any generated files, e.g. HTML, png, CSS, etc., are not included in this status report because it is ok for generated content to have uncommitted changes.
These are the previous versions of the repository in which changes were made to the R Markdown (
analysis/index.Rmd) and HTML (
index.html) files. If you’ve configured a remote Git repository (see
?wflow_git_remote), click on the hyperlinks in the table below to view the files as they were in that past version.
|Rmd||fa2a72f||Luke McGuinness||2020-06-02||Customising to our review|
|html||fa2a72f||Luke McGuinness||2020-06-02||Customising to our review|
|Rmd||b66043b||Luke McGuinness||2020-06-02||Inital commit|
|html||b66043b||Luke McGuinness||2020-06-02||Inital commit|
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused widespread morbidity and mortality as well as disruption to people’s lives and livelihoods around the world; this has occurred as a result of both infection with the virus itself and the health protection measures taken to curb its spread. There are concerns that rates of suicide, suicidal behaviours and self-harm may rise during and in the aftermath of the pandemic. Given the likely rapidly expanding research evidence base on the pandemic’s impact on rates of suicide, suicidal behaviours and self-harm and emerging evidence about how best to mitigate such effects, it is important that the best available knowledge is made readily available to policymakers, public health specialists and clinicians as soon as is possible. To facilitate this, we plan to undertake a living systematic review focusing on suicide prevention in relation to COVID-19.
Regular automated searches will feed into a web-based screening system which will also host the data extraction form for included articles. Our eligibility criteria are wide and include aspects of incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour, effects of exposures and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, with minimal restrictions on the types of study design to be included. The outcomes assessed will be death by suicide; self-harm or attempted suicide (including hospital attendance and/or admission for these reasons); and suicidal thoughts/ideation. There will be no restriction on study type, except for single case reports. There will be no restriction on language of publication. The review will be updated at three-monthly intervals if a sufficient volume of new evidence justifies doing so.
Please see the “Results” tab for a summary of the current evidence.