Conference Agenda

Clinical efforts at innovation in suicide prevention remain a complex and challenging topic. Numerous interventions that specifically target suicide have been investigated in recent years including creation and refinement of specific psychotherapies (e.g. CBT for Suicide Prevention), pharmacological treatments (e.g. ketamine), improvements to health systems (e.g. Zero suicide), detection and monitoring (e.g. ecological momentary assessment), and suicide prediction (e.g. machine learning techniques). Although each type of intervention has some scientific evidence, there remain fundamental questions about the role of suicide-specific interventions in the context of more general efforts and innovations to treat key underlying conditions that give rise to suicide (e.g. hard-to-treat depression) and to address social antecedents of suicide (e.g. helping someone at risk find housing or stable work). This presentation will emphasize the importance of a holistic and personalized approach to clinical intervention that acknowledges that the factors influencing suicide at the individual level can be diverse and require a flexible approach. It will consider both the benefits and also the limitations of recent innovations.

A whole-of-government approach to suicide prevention recognises that the factors contributing to suicidal distress are complex, interconnected, and extend well beyond the health system. Effective prevention requires coordinated action across sectors including health, education, housing, employment, justice, community services, and digital and communications agencies. Central to this approach is a shared commitment to reducing vulnerability by addressing the social, economic, and environmental conditions that increase suicide risk.

Mental illness, chronic pain, and substance use disorders remain significant contributors to suicidal behaviour; therefore, accessible, culturally safe, and well-integrated mental health care must be at the core of government efforts. However, many key risks—such as relationship breakdown, loneliness, low educational attainment, and long-term unemployment—require responses from social services, schools, and workplaces. Policies that promote strong social connections, parental support programs, and community participation can help reduce isolation and build protective networks.

Economic security is another essential pillar. Poverty and unemployment increase stress and reduce access to support. Whole-of-government prevention includes job-creation initiatives, income support policies that promote stability, and targeted employment services for vulnerable groups. Similarly, homelessness and lack of stable accommodation significantly elevate suicide risk. Coordinated action between housing, health, and community agencies can ensure timely access to safe housing, supported accommodation, and wrap-around case management.

Addressing the lifelong impacts of adverse childhood events requires early-intervention systems such as child protection reform, trauma-informed schools, family support services, and youth mental health programs. The justice system also plays a vital role by ensuring safe environments in custody, smooth transitions into community supports, and continuity of care for individuals with complex needs.

Overall, a whole-of-government approach integrates policy, funding, data sharing, and community partnerships. By aligning efforts across sectors, governments can more effectively reduce risks, strengthen protective factors, and create the conditions for people to live connected, purposeful, and supported lives.

While there are a large number of challenges to suicide

prevention and research, including overall policies and directions

of travel, there have been important recent developments. For example, the considerable increase in the number of countries with national suicide prevention strategies, alongside

the reduction in countries in which suicidal behaviour is illegal. According to

WHO data here has been an encouraging reduction in recent years in the

global suicide rate (although admittedly well below the decline needed to

achieve the WHO 2030 target). The initiation and increased promotion of

World Suicide Prevention Day has probably helped promote public awareness

of suicide as an issue and opportunities for helping people at risk.

Establishment of near real-time suicide data collection has improved our

ability to estimate effects of important events on suicide, and to identify

emergence of new suicide methods and also suicide clusters. Banning of

highly hazardous pesticides has resulted in major decreases in suicide rates

in some lower-and-middle-income countries. Media reporting of suicides has

improved greatly in many countries. There have also been some

improvements in clinical interventions for suicide prevention, including

identification of psychosocial interventions that may help reduce suicidal

behaviour, recognition that risk prediction is ineffective and that therapeutic

risk management is to be preferred, alongside safety planning, and

identification of the value of some pharmacological interventions in reducing

risk of suicidal behaviour. In many countries, thankfully, far more attention is

now paid to the needs of people bereaved by suicide. I believe that

acknowledgement of what has been achieved in recent times should help

provide a major impetus for policy makes, researchers and front-line workers

to continue to try to address the wide-ranging challenges that are and will

continue to be involved in suicide prevention. Challenges of suicide prevention theory and research historically and into the

future.

Suicide prevention theory and research have long faced significant challenges, many

of which continue to shape the field’s future. Historically, one major obstacle has

been the stigma surrounding suicide, which limited open discussion, hindered data

collection and discouraged funding. Early theories often relied on too narrow a

disciplinary lens—resulting in fragmented models that failed to fully capture the

complexity of suicidal behaviour. Methodological difficulties, including reliance on

retrospective data, small samples, and inconsistent definitions, further affected the

reliability and comparability of findings. Ethical concerns also restricted the ability to

study high-risk individuals directly, slowing the accumulation of knowledge and the

development of effective interventions.

Looking to the future, the field must address several ongoing and emerging

challenges. Suicide is a multifactorial phenomenon, requiring integrative models that

account for biological, psychological, social, cultural, and environmental influences.

Advances in technology—such as digital phenotyping, machine learning, and social

media analytics—offer new opportunities but also raise privacy, equity, and

implementation concerns. Global disparities in mental health resources and culturally

appropriate frameworks remain significant barriers to effective prevention worldwide.

Additionally, translating research into scalable, evidence-based interventions

continues to lag behind scientific advances. Strengthening interdisciplinary

collaboration, enhancing ethical research practices, and prioritising lived and living

experience perspectives will be essential for more accurate, compassionate, and

impactful suicide prevention efforts.

This presenation will cover the known best practices for designing and developing a Think Tank. Topics to be covered will include designing the scope, developing values, number and roles for participants to be balanced, and a tiered leadership approach. It will address timeframes, key milestones and markers of success, as well as recommended processes for gaining input.

The presentation will also cover the background conducted by Drs Reidenberg and Silverman in the early efforts to design the Think Tank, participants and directions. Initial questions that the field can address include: what are we trying to prevent, how are we doing it, the problem of relying on risk factors, are we focused on the low hanging fruit approach, are community-based approaches the most effective and if so, how can they be scaled, the problem with public health approaches to suicide prevention, the potential for applying implementation science to suicide prevention, what role does prediction play in prevention, what does the future look like with technology (social media, AI chatbots and online therapy).

The goal of the presentation is to demonstrate the need for and value for a Think Tank and seek audience participation in helping design it.