Suicide rates in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-national data provide no evidence of an increase

fahim-r-1B8l_3ckncI-unsplash

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the mental health and living conditions of people across the globe. Mental health professionals, policy makers and the public have expressed concerns that this could lead to an increase in suicide rates (Gunnell et al., 2020), potentially adding to the estimated 800,000 people worldwide dying by suicide every year.

In this blog, we outline the findings of a study describing international suicide rates in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This responded to the concerns about apparently contradictory findings from a range of studies (some with methodological limitations) over whether suicide rates had changed over this period.

The authors of the study aimed to gain a picture of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates internationally by gathering real-time data from official sources and comparing the observed numbers of suicides with the numbers expected based on the underlying temporal trends. This is an important undertaking, and in a related blog (Appleby, 2021), an author of this study acknowledged:

It’s important to stress that the graphs and figures that are used to answer this question are not dry data. They represent real lives lost, real families devastated. No suicide rate, whether high or low, rising or falling, is acceptable.

The present study aimed to gain an international picture of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates by gathering real-time data from official sources, and comparing the observed numbers of suicides with the numbers expected based on the underlying temporal trends.

The present study aimed to gain an international picture of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates by gathering real-time data from official sources and comparing the observed numbers of suicides with the numbers expected based on the underlying temporal trends.

Methods

The authors sought real-time suicide data from individual countries, capturing the recording of suspected suicides as they occurred via local sources such as police or death certificates, and providing the potential for early detection of risk patterns (Appleby et al., 2021). Real-time suicide surveillance systems pre-date the COVID-19 pandemic and despite the potential for bias in how they classify a suspected suicide, they offer responsiveness advantages over the traditional system of waiting for official suicide statistics, which can take up to a year following the coronial process.

The authors searched for real-time suicide data using countries’ official websites, as well as broader internet searches, academic literature and their contacts at international suicide prevention organisations. To be included, data had to originate from official government sources, cover countries or areas within countries, and be available from at least 1st Jan 2019 to 31st July 2020 at a monthly level.

To model the trends in monthly suicides before COVID-19 in each country or area, the authors used interrupted time-series analysis, accounting for time trends and seasonality wherever possible.

Results

The authors sourced data from 21 countries (16 high-income countries and 5 upper-middle income countries), covering the period until the end of July 2020, and in some cases, until the end of October 2020.

For all countries or areas included in the study, there was no evidence of an increase in suicides from the start of the pandemic until the end of July 2020 compared to figures expected based on pre-pandemic temporal trends. In 12 countries or areas (Ecuador; Japan; New Zealand; South Korea; Leipzig, Germany, and several areas in Australia, Canada, and the USA) there was evidence of a significant decrease in suicides.

One sensitivity analysis highlighted the importance of taking a longer-term view. When the analysis included additional data (available for some areas) until the end of October 2020, the results remained unchanged for most countries. However, three areas where no difference had been observed in the main analysis showed an overall reduction in suicides over this longer period (Thames Valley, UK; Mexico City, Mexico; Victoria, Australia), whilst three showed an increase (Japan; Puerto Rico; Vienna, Austria).  It will be important for the living systematic review, led by the International COVID-19 Suicide Prevention Research Collaboration (ICSPRC), to continue with its valuable outputs to monitor trends.

For all countries or areas included in the study, there was no evidence of an increase in suicides from the start of the pandemic until the end of July 2020 compared to figures expected based on pre-pandemic temporal trends.

For all countries or areas included in the study, there was no evidence of an increase in suicides from the start of the pandemic until the end of July 2020 compared to figures expected based on pre-pandemic temporal trends.

Conclusions

The authors concluded that there is no evidence to support an increase in suicide rates during the pandemic’s early months in the 21 countries for which they accessed data. This consistent finding across many countries increases confidence in these conclusions and suggests that COVID-19 risk mitigation measures may not have led to population-level increases in suicide rates during this period. This could be attributed to various protective factors mitigating the potential for increases in suicides:

  • Social adaptations (e.g., communities supporting at-risk individuals, individuals connecting in new ways; households spending more time with each other) may have improved social support.
  • Individuals with depressive or anxiety symptoms, or suicidal thoughts, may have been able to access flexible, high-quality mental healthcare within the statutory and voluntary sectors. This seems unlikely within the UK (Samaritans, 2021).
  • Occupational stressors may have been reduced for some people working from home.
  • Being united in common adversity might have contributed to a sense of societal integration or solidarity.
  • The rapid, financial support offered to individuals and businesses in many countries (such as furlough schemes) may have buffered the economic consequences of the pandemic.

This picture is neither complete nor final but serves as the best available evidence on the pandemic’s early effects on suicide rates.

There is no evidence to support an increase in suicide rates during the pandemic's early months in the 21 countries for which the authors accessed data. This picture is neither complete nor final but serves as the best available evidence on the pandemic's early effects on suicide rates.

There is no evidence to support an increase in suicide rates during the pandemic’s early months in the 21 countries for which the authors accessed data. This picture is neither complete nor final, but serves as the best available evidence on the pandemic’s early effects on suicide rates.

Strengths and limitations

This study is the first to combine data from multiple countries to examine the early effects of COVID-19 on suicide, taking into account pre-pandemic trends. However, it is important to understand that it describes only the early stage of the pandemic, and findings cannot be extrapolated to future phases. Given what we know about the anticipated longer-term effects (Gunnell et al., 2020), the links between economic factors and suicide (Lewis & Sloggett, 1998), and the importance of social protections in cushioning economic shocks (Karanikolos et al., 2013), this finding does not rule out a lag in suicides whilst risk factors accumulate.

Short timeframe

The study necessarily covers only the early months of the pandemic. However, the risk of suicide associated with the pandemic is likely to be dynamic and risk factors may change over different stages of the pandemic with varying levels of support and accumulating economic challenges. In Japan, the initial decrease (until July 2020) followed by an increase in suicide rates evidences their dynamic nature (Ueda et al., 2021). Mental health consequences are likely to last longer and peak later than the pandemic itself (Gunnell et al., 2020). The short timeframe covered also presents issues of power. Some included countries had low numbers of monthly suicides, and findings from those areas should be interpreted with caution.

Focus on higher-income countries

The study did not represent findings from low-income or lower-middle-income countries due to a lack of reliable data: a long-standing issue. These countries account for 46% of the world’s suicides (World Health Organization, 2014). Many have been hit particularly hard by the pandemic and do not have strong economic safety nets. It is possible that the risk of suicide during the pandemic has differed in those settings, and may continue to evolve differently.

Unknown trends among demographic groups

The study provides a picture only at the level of the whole population for many included countries, and the analysis was unable to stratify the data by age, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or sexual orientation. These are key sociodemographic risk factors for suicide, yet by averaging across the whole population, worrying trends among certain demographic groups may have been obscured.

This is important because the pandemic may have had differential effects on mental health and suicide risk in different demographic groups, exacerbating previous inequalities across the social gradient and for ethnic and other minorities. The pandemic created a mix of protective and risk factors relating to mental health (Gunnell et al., 2020): it is likely that some groups enjoyed many of the protective factors and few of the negative, with the converse applying to those already at high risk for poor health outcomes, including suicide. Qualitative work suggests that people with pre-existing mental health problems have particularly struggled during the pandemic, perceived especially among those in ethnic minority groups (Gillard et al., 2021).

These concerns are supported by data on suicides in Maryland, USA from 1st Jan 2017 to 7th July 2020 (not included in the present study due to inclusion criteria on dates). During a two month period early in the pandemic, suicides in Maryland increased significantly in black groups and decreased significantly in white groups (Bray et al., 2021). Over the whole six months, period suicide rates fell significantly, and markedly in white groups, but were unchanged in black groups (Bray et al., 2021). This finding underscores the importance of looking at more fine-grained data in order not to miss worrying trends sub-nationally in specific populations defined by ethnicity, age, gender, or region (Pitman et al., 2012).

This study is the first to combine data from multiple countries on the early effects of COVID-19 on suicide, taking account of pre-pandemic trends. However, it describes only the early stage of the pandemic and at the level of the whole population, so findings cannot be extrapolated to future phases or demographic groups.

This study is the first to combine data from multiple countries on the early effects of COVID-19 on suicide, taking into account pre-pandemic trends. However, it describes only the early stage of the pandemic and at the level of the whole population, so findings cannot be extrapolated to future phases or demographic groups.

Implications for practice

  • Continue to monitor real-time data and be alert to any increases in suicide, particularly as the pandemic’s full economic consequences emerge and financial support is withdrawn or reduced in most countries.
  • Redouble our efforts to understand the pandemic’s effects on suicides in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, by supporting them to collect mortality data (both on COVID-related deaths and suicides).
  • Understand what has buffered the negative impacts of COVID-19 mitigation measures on suicide rates during the pandemic’s early months, and what drives any increases should they occur. A comparison of suicide trends in countries that implemented additional mental health supports and/or financial safety nets may help understand the contribution of service non-responsiveness and/or fiscal austerity.
  • Countries must ensure that mental health services remain responsive, and provide appropriate financial protections, rather than becoming complaisant regarding mental health impacts.
  • Recognise that suicide is not the only indicator of the negative mental health effects of the pandemic; levels of community distress are high, and we need to ensure that people are supported.
  • The research community has struggled over the course of the pandemic to establish clear communication lines with the media and the policy community, and this needs to be addressed so that researchers can communicate findings on mental health impacts to governments and communities in safe, non-sensationalist ways as a means of influencing policy appropriately.
  • Rises in suicide rates are not inevitable in times of national crisis, and the media should be aware of this study’s findings in tempering a tendency to sensationalism over adverse impacts (Hawton et al., 2021).

    We need to continue monitoring real-time data and be alert to any increases in suicide, ensure that mental health services remain responsive and understand the protective factors on suicide rates during the pandemics' early months. 

    We need to continue monitoring real-time data and be alert to any increases in suicide, ensure that mental health services remain responsive and understand the protective factors on suicide rates during the pandemics’ early months.

Support

If you have been affected by the issues discussed in this article and feel you need support, please consult this website provided by the Oxford Health BRC or the Samaritans.

Statement of interests

Alexandra Pitman has worked with some of the authors of the primary paper on other projects and works clinically for the Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust, but had no involvement in this study.

Links

Primary paper

Pirkis, J., John, A., Shin, S., DelPozo-Banos, M., Arya, V., Analuisa-Aguilar, P., Appleby, L., Arensman, E., Bantjes, J., Baran, A., Bertolote, J. M., Borges, G., Brečić, P., Caine, E., Castelpietra, G., Chang, S. Sen, Colchester, D., Crompton, D., Curkovic, M., … Spittal, M. J. (2021). Suicide trends in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: an interrupted time-series analysis of preliminary data from 21 countries. The Lancet Psychiatry, 0366(21), 1–10.

Other references

Appleby, L. (2021). Louis Appleby: What has been the effect of covid-19 on suicide rates? British Medical Journal.

Appleby, L., Richards, N., Ibrahim, S., Turnbull, P., Rodway, C., & Kapur, N. (2021). Suicide in England in the COVID-19 pandemic: Early observational data from real time surveillance. The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, 4, 100110.

Bray, M. J. C., Daneshvari, N. O., Radhakrishnan, I., Cubbage, J., Eagle, M., Southall, P., & Nestadt, P. S. (2021). Racial Differences in Statewide Suicide Mortality Trends in Maryland During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic. JAMA Psychiatry, 78(4), 444–447.

Gillard, S., Dare, C., Hardy, J., Nyikavaranda, P., Rowan Olive, R., Shah, P., Birken, M., Foye, U., Ocloo, J., Pearce, E., Stefanidou, T., Pitman, A., Simpson, A., Johnson, S., & Lloyd-Evans, B. (2021). Experiences of living with mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a coproduced, participatory qualitative interview study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 0123456789.

Gunnell, D., Appleby, L., Arensman, E., Hawton, K., John, A., Kapur, N., Khan, M., O’Connor, R. C., Pirkis, J., Caine, E. D., Chan, L. F., Chang, S. Sen, Chen, Y. Y., Christensen, H., Dandona, R., Eddleston, M., Erlangsen, A., Harkavy-Friedman, J., Kirtley, O. J., … Yip, P. S. (2020). Suicide risk and prevention during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(6), 468–471.

Hawton, K., Marzano, L., Fraser, L., Hawley, M., Harris-Skillman, E., & Lainez, Y. X. (2021). Reporting on suicidal behaviour and COVID-19—need for caution. The Lancet Psychiatry, 8(1), 15–17.

Karanikolos, M., Mladovsky, P., Cylus, J., Thomson, S., Basu, S., Stuckler, D., MacKenbach, J. P., & McKee, M. (2013). Financial crisis, austerity, and health in Europe. The Lancet, 381(9874), 1323–1331.

Lewis, G., & Sloggett, A. (1998). Suicide, deprivation, and unemployment: Record linkage study. British Medical Journal, 317(7168), 1283–1286.

Pitman, A., Krysinska, K., Osborn, D., & King, M. (2012). Suicide in young men. The Lancet, 379(9834), 2383–2392.

Samaritans. (2021). Mental Health. Life during the Pandemic.

Ueda, M., Nordström, R., & Matsubayashi, T. (2021). Suicide and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Journal of Public Health, 3, 1–21.

World Health Organization. (2014). Preventing suicide Preventing suicide. WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data, 89.

Photo credits

Share on Facebook Tweet this on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+
Mark as read
Create a personal elf note about this blog
Profile photo of Karel Kieslich

Karel Kieslich

Karel became fascinated with psychiatry during his medical training. Yet, confronted with the unsatisfying neurobiological validity of psychiatric nosology, and seeing that the available treatments didn’t work for many patients, he decided to direct his efforts into research rather than clinical practice. After completing his medical degree in Prague and an MSc in Cognitive Neuroscience at UCL, he spent two years as a research assistant in the Neuroscience and Mental Health group at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at UCL, where he worked on a series of studies investigating the cognitive mechanisms of motivational symptoms in depression, and the role of dopamine in these. During his PhD, he would like to focus on finding ways to better target interventions to individuals. He believes this is best done through characterising the neurobiological mechanisms underlying symptoms transdiagnostically, as well as understanding the mechanisms of action of existing effective or promising novel treatments. He is an avid cyclist and loves to teach, watch art films and explore London and its many faces.

More posts - Website

Follow me here –

Profile photo of Rosalind McAlpine

Rosalind McAlpine

Rosalind completed her BA in Experimental Psychology at Oxford University, where she specialised in neuroscience, social psychology, and developmental questions in science and religion. She then completed her MRes in Developmental Neuroscience and Psychopathology at UCL, followed by a year working as a Post-Graduate Research Fellow at Yale University. In her rotational year she will be working on projects with (1) Sunjeev Kamboj/Vaughan Bell, (2) David Osborn and (3) Ray Dolan/Rani Moran. She is interested in research focusing on the development of novel psychological and/or pharmacological treatments within clinical psychology (e.g., psychedelic research); a venture which necessitates interdisciplinary collaboration, encompassing neuroscience, psychopharmacology, social-psychological theory and policy. She is particularly interested in mechanisms of action, as well as comparisons between the use of psychedelic substances in traditional/ceremonial retreat settings and their place in Western psychiatric models. She considers the development of effective prevention and treatment strategies - with emphasis on the requirement of increased cultural competency - incredibly important if we are to progress within mental health science.

More posts - Website

Follow me here –

Profile photo of Alexandra Pitman

Alexandra Pitman

Alexandra Pitman is a Clinical Associate Professor in the UCL Division of Psychiatry and an Honorary Consultant Psychiatrist at Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust. Her research interests are in the epidemiology of suicide and self-harm, the relationship between loneliness and suicidality, and in suicide prevention. Her clinical interests are in psychosocial interventions for people with suicidal thoughts in liaison, community, and in-patient settings. She completed her MSc in health policy at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the London School of Economics, and her PhD at UCL on the impact of suicide bereavement. Together with Professor Sonia Johnson, she leads the UKRI-funded Loneliness and Social Isolation in Mental Health research network (@UCL_Loneliness). She is also funded by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and the UCL Institute of Mental Health to study influences on suicide and self-harm risk. She sits on the editorial board of the British Journal of Psychiatry, and tweets in a personal capacity as @DrAPitman

More posts

Follow me here –