We formulated a harmonized definition of occupational burnout concept and experts from 29 countries consensually approved it. Official medical vocabulary should integrate this concept and its definition. This will reduce the semantic confusion associated with this concept, improve the quality of evidence on this outcome, and stimulate the research on diagnostic standards, paramount for treatment and prevention of occupational burnout.

Objectives This review aimed to quantify suicide risk among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers and study potential variations of risk within this population. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis from 1995 to 2016 using MEDLINE and following the PRISMA guidelines. A pooled effect size of suicide risk among the population of interest was calculated using meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate whether effect size differed according to population or study characteristics. Meta-regression was used to identify sources of heterogeneity. Results The systematic review identified 65 studies, of which 32 were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled effect size was 1.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-1.68] representing an excess of suicide risk among the population of interest. Subgroup analysis showed that this effect size varied according to geographic area, with a higher effect size in Japan. The following study characteristics were found to contribute to the between-study variance: reference group, measure of effect size, and study design. Conclusions Our findings suggest an excess of suicide risk among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers and demonstrated that this excess may be even higher for these groups in Japan. This review highlights the need for suicide prevention policies focusing on this specific population of workers. More research is also needed to better understand the underlying factors that may increase suicide risk in this population.

Background In northern countries, suicide rates among prisoners are at least three times higher for men and nine times higher for women than in the general population. The objective of this study is to describe the sociodemographic, penal, health characteristics and circumstances of suicide of French prisoners who died by suicide. Methods This study is an intermediate analysis of the French epidemiological surveillance program of suicides in prison. All suicides in prison in 2017–2018 in France were included in the study. Archival sociodemographic and penal data and specific data on the circumstances of the suicidal act were provided by the National Prison Service. Health data was provided by physicians working in prison using a standardized questionnaire. Results In 2017–2018, 235 prisoners died by suicide. The suicide rate was 16.8/10 000 person-years. Among suicide cases, 94.9% were male, 27.2% were under 30, 25.1% were aged 30 to 39, 27.7% were aged 40 to 49 and 20.0% were 50 or older. At the time of suicide, 48.5% were on custodial remand. Incarceration is associated with a threefold increase in the frequency of anxio-depressive disorders (24.6% in prison versus 8.2% before prison). The week before the suicidal act, 60% of prisoners visited the health unit and a significant event was detected for 61% of all cases. Suicide was less than 1 week after prison entry for 11.9% of prisoners, corresponding to a suicide rate 6.4 (CI95% [4.3 – 9.5]) times higher than for the remaining time in prison, and was more than 1 year after entry for 33.7% of them. Conclusions The high frequency of events the week before suicide in our study suggests that events in prison could play a role in the occurrence of suicides. Comparative studies are needed to further explore the time association between events and suicide in prison. As most of prisoners who died by suicide visited the health unit the week before suicide, the identification of triggering factors could help psychiatrists and other health professionals to assess the short-term risk of suicide and to implement preventive measures.

We thank Dr Rahman Shiri (1) for his careful reading of our systematic review and meta-analysis on suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers (2). Our paper had the objective of providing a pooled effect size of suicide for this occupational group. Suicide is a crucial issue in public and occupational health. Suicide has a multifactorial etiology and recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have pointed out the role of occupational exposures, mainly psychosocial work stressors, as risk factors for suicide (3, 4). Suicide is a very rare event in the general population and still more seldom in the working population. Indeed, unemployed and economically inactive people have a higher risk of suicide compared to employed people (5, 6). However, the total number of suicides is greater in the employed population than among the economically inactive or unemployed (6). Shiri's letter (1) questioned several aspects of our review and meta-analysis. One comment related to the single reference database used in our review and a suggestion that our review could not be considered to be systematic. The review was based on Medline because our main interest was in quantitative epidemiologic studies. This is the largest database for biomedical literature and we would argue the most pertinent. Furthermore, we checked the reference lists of the most recent papers and literature reviews, and Shiri did not report any paper that was missing. No review, whether searching one or more databases, can expect to be totally exhaustive. There may always be missing studies, especially if we consider grey literature. Thus we assert that our review was systematic, while acknowledging that it may not be perfectly comprehensive. Shiri suggested an absence of quality assessment of the studies included in our meta-analysis. First, quality was considered in the context of our comments in the discussion section. Second, as suggested by Rothman et al (7), quality assessment was replaced by regression analyses of the effect of each quality item (study characteristics, ie, study design, effect measure, reference group, and adjustment). Third, because most studies included in this review were based on objective data (census, administrative, or register data), they were free of many of the sources of bias that exist in studies where information on exposure and outcome must be collected from participants. Consequently, many of the items related to quality were not pertinent, such as response and follow-up rates, coverage and representativeness of the sample, selection, etc. Contrary to what Shiri suggested, all study designs can be informative in this topic because all of them are able to provide an unbiased estimate of the effect size. In addition, the prospective and case-control studies may have shortcomings. For example, we excluded five studies including three prospective and case-control studies in the sensibility analysis because the group of interest was defined on the basis of the exposure to chemicals (pesticides) rather than job ti...