Study protocol for a mixed methods prospective cohort study to explore experiences of care following a suicidal crisis in the Australian healthcare system.

INTRODUCTION: For individuals presenting to the emergency department (ED) for a suicide attempt, the period after discharge from hospital is marked by heightened vulnerability for further suicide attempts. Effective care following a suicidal crisis has the potential to significantly decrease this risk. The current study aims to examine the impact of the LifeSpan multilevel suicide prevention model on experiences of care following a suicidal crisis. Perspectives from healthcare consumers (individuals who have presented to the ED following a suicidal crisis), carers, and health professionals will be explored. The LifeSpan model is currently being evaluated as a high-fidelity trial in four geographically defined regions in New South Wales, Australia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will use a mixed methods prospective cohort design. Quantitative data collection includes a structured survey, administered to healthcare consumers from LifeSpan sites and control sites. Two cohorts of healthcare consumers will be recruited 12 months apart with baseline assessment occurring within 18 months of the ED presentation, and follow-up 12 months after the initial assessment. Survey participants will be recruited online and through participating EDs, mental health organisations and aftercare services. Qualitative interview data from healthcare consumers, carers who have accompanied a loved one to the ED following a suicidal crisis and health professionals who provide care to people at risk of suicide will be collected concurrently with the recruitment of the first cohort of survey participants. Purposive and convenience sampling techniques will be used for recruitment of interview participants. The primary outcome for this study will be healthcare consumers' experiences of service provided at the ED. Analysis will be undertaken of the change over time within LifeSpan sites, as well as between LifeSpan sites and control sites, using mixed effects repeated measures models as principal means of data analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research has been approved by the Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/17/HNE/144). Results will be disseminated via conferences and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617000457347.

Making Sense of SNPs: Women's Understanding and Experiences of Receiving a Personalized Profile of Their Breast Cancer Risks.

Genome wide association studies have identified a number of common genetic variants - single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) - that combine to increase breast cancer risk. SNP profiling may enhance the accuracy of risk assessment and provides a personalized risk estimate. SNP testing for breast cancer risks may supplement other genetic tests in the future, however, before it can be implemented in the clinic we need to know how it will be perceived and received. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 39 women who had previously had a breast cancer diagnosis and undergone BRCA1/2 testing, participated in the Variants in Practice (ViP) study and received personalized risk (SNP) profiles. Interviews explored their understanding and experiences of receiving this SNP information. Women reported feeling positive about receiving their personalized risk profile, because it: provided an explanation for their previous diagnosis of cancer, vindicated previous risk management decisions and clarified their own and other family members' risks. A small group was initially shocked to learn of the increased risk of a second primary breast cancer. This study suggests that the provision of personalized risk information about breast cancer generated by SNP profiling is understood and well received. However, a model of genetic counseling that incorporates monogenic and polygenic genetic information will need to be developed prior to clinical implementation.