Research Trends in Suicide Bereavement and Postvention – A Global Bibliometric and Content Analysis
Laura Hofmann, Adelia Khrisna Putri, Tania Pearce, Elahe Derakhshan, Smita Dinakaramani, Christine Genest, Lisbeth Hybholt, Meta Lavrič, Myfanwy Maple, Oscar Modesto, Pernilla Larsson Omerov, Chandra Ramamurthy, Lucia Rojs, John Whitebrook, Dolores Angela Castelli Dransart, Amy Chow, Grace Cully, Diego De Leo, William Feigelman, Eve Griffin, Guðrún Jóna Guðlaugsdóttir, Karolina Krysinska, Sylvie Lapierre, Edouard Leaune, Antoon A. Leenaars, Yossi Levi-Belz, Sandra McNally, Ravivarma Rao Panirselvam, Alexandra Pitman, Vita Poštuvan, Karen Scavacini, Prakarn Thomyangkoon, Birgit Wagner, Karl AndriessenAbstract: Background: Suicide bereavement refers to the grief experienced by individuals who have lost a close contact to suicide. It is often characterized by intense emotional distress, feelings of guilt, stigma, and social isolation, and may increase the risk of mental health problems and suicidal behavior. As research on suicide bereavement and postvention continues to expand globally, there is a growing need to map its development systematically and identify key trends. Aims: This study aimed to describe patterns in published literature on suicide bereavement and postvention through a global bibliometric analysis. Method: Systematic searches in eight databases (Web of Science; Scopus; CINAHL; PsycINFO; MEDLINE; Embase; Emcare; APA PsycArticles) yielded 49,386 references. After deduplication and screening, 1,072 articles published between 1953 and 2025 were included. Eligible peer-reviewed publications included empirical research, evidence syntheses (systematic reviews, scoping reviews, meta-analyses) and nonempirical publications (such as opinion pieces, and personal experiences). There were no restrictions on language, location, or year of publication. Results: The 1,072 eligible publications demonstrated a steady increase in suicide bereavement/postvention publications annually. 95% of publications were by first authors from high-income countries, while 1.3% of first authors were from lower-middle-income and low-income countries. Most studies were empirical and followed a quantitative or qualitative design, primarily cross-sectional, increasing over the years, while nonempirical publications declined. We identified few longitudinal or interventional studies. Populations sampled most frequently were working-age adults, with few studies focused on older adults. Limitations: The results provide little information about the methodological quality of the included studies. Some full texts could not be found and were unavailable for data extraction. Conclusion: The research gaps identified suggest that future studies should focus on underrepresented populations as well as on high-quality intervention studies to address adverse outcomes among suicide loss survivors.