Suicide Ideation in Oncology: A Mixed‐Methods Feasibility Study Exploring the Perspective of Affected Patients

Background/Aim Cancer patients face a higher risk of suicide than the general population, yet suicidality in oncology remains underexplored. This feasibility study aimed to inform a larger mixed‐methods project by testing quantitative assessment tools on suicidal ideation (SI) and related factors and piloting a qualitative interview guide. The study explored patients’ experiences, sources of distress and SI, and interactions with healthcare professionals, while evaluating the practicality and acceptability of study procedures. Methods This convergent mixed‐methods study combined validated questionnaires (e.g., Patient Health Questionnaire) with semistructured interviews analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Patients were recruited based on their level of distress, regardless of cancer type or stage. In order to evaluate feasibility, barriers, problems, and patient feedback were systematically documented. Results Ten patients completed questionnaires, and nine also participated in interviews. Questionnaires took an average of 20.5 min, interviews 32 min, indicating good feasibility and tolerance. Participants found discussing sensitive topics manageable and sometimes relieving. Minor assistance and flexible scheduling were occasionally required. Four patients reported thoughts of wanting to die on some days in the past 2 weeks, and seven interviewees described suicidality or life‐weariness since diagnosis. The qualitative data suggest that the triggers of SI are highly individual and diverse. Patients also express a strong desire for open communication with healthcare professionals about mental health and challenging topics like suicidality or death. Conclusion The study provided valuable insights into the feasibility of assessing SI and related factors in cancer patients for a larger follow‐up study. Participants were generally willing to engage in questionnaires and interviews and reported no increased distress from discussing these topics. Findings suggest that SI may be an important, under‐recognized aspect of cancer care. Patients expressed a desire for open communication with healthcare professionals. Further research with larger, more representative samples is needed to expand these findings.