Description: Introduction Pesticide self-poisoning is one of the most frequently used methods of suicide worldwide, killing over 300 000 people annually. Around 15–20% of pesticide self-poisonings occur soon after the person has bought the pesticide from a shop. We aim to determine the characteristics of individuals who purchase pesticides directly from shops and how they differ from individuals who access pesticides from other sources such as home, home garden or farmland. This information will help inform possible vendor/shop-based intervention strategies aimed at reducing access to pesticides used for self-harm. Methods and analysis This study will investigate risk factors associated with purchasing pesticides for acts of self-poisoning from pesticide shops, including cases identified over a 9-month period using a population-based case–control group approach. Four interviewer-administered data collection tools will be used for this study: a semistructured questionnaire, Beck Suicidal Intent Scale (SIS), Clinical Interview Schedule—Sinhalese version (CIS-Sn) and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Each case (expected n=33) will be compared with two groups of individuals: (1) those who have self-poisoned using pesticides from the home, home garden or farmland and (2) those who bought pesticides from the same shops as the above cases, but not did not self-poison. Logistic regression models will be used to identify risk factors of purchasing pesticides for self-poisoning from shops. Ethics and dissemination The study has received ethical approval from the Ethical Review Committee of the Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka. A sensitive data collection technique will be used and ethical issues will be considered throughout the study. Results will be disseminated in scientific peer-reviewed articles.

Description: Introduction An estimated 803 900 people worldwide died as a result of self-harm in 2012. The deliberate ingestion of pesticides has been identified as the method most frequently used to commit fatal self-harm globally. In Sri Lanka, it is estimated that up to 60% of all suicides are committed using this method. The aim of the present study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of an ongoing safe storage intervention currently taking place in a rural Sri Lankan district and to model the cost-effectiveness of implementing the safe storage intervention as well as four potential interventions (legislative, medical management, follow-up contact and mobile phone contact) on a national level. Methods and analysis Study design for all the strategies is a cost-effectiveness analysis. A governmental perspective is adopted. The time horizon for tracking the associated costs and health outcomes of the safe storage intervention on district level runs over 3 years. The time horizon is extended to 5 years when modelling a full national roll-out of the respective interventions. The discounting of costs and health outcomes are undertaken at the recommended real rate of 3%. Threshold analyses of the modelled strategies are employed to assess the strategies potential for cost-effectiveness, running scenarios with health outcome improvements ranging from 1% to 100%. Sensitivity analyses are also performed. The main outcome measures of the safe storage intervention are incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was granted for the safe storage project from the University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, in March of 2008. An amendment for the present study was granted from Rajarata University of Sri Lanka in November of 2013. Findings will be disseminated to public and private stakeholders in local and national government in Sri Lanka as well as the wider academic audience through peer-reviewed publications and international conferences. Trial registration number The safe storage cluster trial is registered with the Clinical Trials, ref: NCT1146496 ( http://clinicaltrialsfeeds.org/clinical-trials/show/NCT1146496 ).