scholarly journals Is it time to abandon suicide risk assessment?

BJPsych Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. e1-e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Declan Murray

SummarySuicide risk assessment includes estimating the likelihood of suicide in words such as ‘low, medium or high’. A ‘high suicide risk’ rating can trigger a powerful urge to eliminate risk immediately. But it is far from clear what ‘high suicide risk’ actually means. In the current state of knowledge, suicide reduction measures should apply to all psychiatric patients, irrespective of an individual patient's perceived risk. For patients presenting with suicidal thoughts, feelings and behaviour, assessment and management should focus on reducing or tolerating emotional pain.

Crisis ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 231-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Nelson ◽  
Megan Johnston ◽  
Amresh Shrivastava

Background: Although a number of suicide-risk assessment tools are available to clinicians, the high levels of suicide still evident in society suggest a clear need for new strategies in order to facilitate the prevention of suicidal behaviors. Aims: The present study examined the utilization of a new structured clinical interview called the Scale for Impact of Suicidality Management, Assessment, and Planning of Care (SIS-MAP). Methods: SIS-MAP ratings were obtained from a group of incoming psychiatric patients over a 6-month period at Regional Mental Health Care, St. Thomas, Canada. Results: A canonical discriminant function analysis resulted in a total 74.0% of original grouped cases correctly classified based on admission status (admitted or not; Wilks λ = .749, p < .001). The specificity of the scale was 78.1%, while the sensitivity of the scale was 66.7%. Additionally, mean total scores on the scale were used to establish clinical cutoffs to facilitate future level of care decisions. Conclusions: Preliminary analysis suggests the SIS-MAP is a valid and reliable tool for determining the level of psychiatric care needed for adults with suicidal ideation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian I. Campos ◽  
Laura S. Van Velzen ◽  
Dick J. Veltman ◽  
Elena Pozzi ◽  
Sonia Ambrogi ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveA major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behaviour. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used across cohorts may represent a limitation to pooling data in international consortia.MethodHere, we examine this issue through two approaches: (i) an extensive literature search on the reliability and concurrent validity of the most commonly used instruments; and (ii) by pooling data (N∼6,000 participants) from cohorts from the ENIGMA-Major Depressive Disorder (ENIGMA-MDD) and ENIGMA-Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviour (ENIGMA-STB) working groups, to assess the concurrent validity of instruments currently used for assessing suicidal thoughts or behaviour.ResultsOur results suggested a pattern of moderate-to-high correlations between instruments, consistent with the wide range of correlations, r=0.22-0.97, reported in the literature. Two common complex instruments, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) and the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation (SSI), were highly correlated with each other (r=0.83), as were suicidal ideation items from common depression severity questionnaires.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that multi-item instruments provide valuable information on different aspects of suicidal thoughts or behaviour, but share a core factor with single suicidal ideation items found in depression severity questionnaires. Multi-site collaborations including cohorts that used distinct instruments for suicide risk assessment should be feasible provided that they harmonise across instruments or focus on specific constructs of suicidal thoughts or behaviours.Key pointsQuestion: To inform future suicide research in multi-site international consortia, it is important to examine how different suicide measures relate to each other and whether they can be used interchangeably.Findings: Findings suggest detailed instruments (such as the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation) provide valuable information on suicidal thoughts and behaviour, and share a core factor with items on suicidal ideation from depression severity rating scale (such as the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale or the Beck Depression Inventory).Importance: Results from international collaborations can mitigate biases by harmonising distinct suicide risk assessment instruments.Next steps: Pooling data within international suicide research consortia may reveal novel clinical, biological and cognitive correlates of suicidal thoughts and/or behaviour.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e0156322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Large ◽  
Muthusamy Kaneson ◽  
Nicholas Myles ◽  
Hannah Myles ◽  
Pramudie Gunaratne ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
David D. Luxton ◽  
M. David Rudd ◽  
Mark A. Reger ◽  
Gregory A. Gahm

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracy K. Witte ◽  
Kimberly A. Van Orden ◽  
Thomas E Joiner

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 1317-1329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique P. Harrison ◽  
Werner G. K. Stritzke ◽  
Nicolas Fay ◽  
Abdul-Rahman Hudaib

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document