Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30874786›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Assessment of a Risk Index for Suicide Attempts Among US Army Soldiers With Suicide Ideation: Analysis of Data From the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (Army STARRS).

Kelly L Zuromski, Samantha L Bernecker, Peter M Gutierrez, Thomas E Joiner, Andrew J King, Howard Liu, James A Naifeh, Matthew K Nock, Nancy A Sampson, Alan M Zaslavsky and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Using predictive analytics to improve pragmatic trial design.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Kelly L ZuromskiDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Samantha L BerneckerDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Peter M GutierrezDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora.
Thomas E JoinerDepartment of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee.
Andrew J KingDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Howard LiuDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
James A NaifehCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University School of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland.
Matthew K NockDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Nancy A SampsonDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Alan M ZaslavskyDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Murray B SteinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.
Robert J UrsanoCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University School of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland.
Ronald C KesslerDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Harvard University · USUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences · USFlorida State University · USUniversity of California, San Diego · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The Department of Veterans Affairs recently began requiring annual suicide ideation (SI) screening of all patients and additional structured questions for patients reporting SI. Related changes are under consideration at the Department of Defense. These changes will presumably lead to higher SI detection, which will require hiring additional clinical staff and/or developing a clinical decision support system to focus in-depth suicide risk assessments on patients considered high risk. Objective: To carry out a proof-of-concept study for whether a brief structured question battery from a survey of US Army soldiers can help target in-depth suicide risk assessments by identifying soldiers with self-reported lifetime SI who are at highest risk of subsequent administratively recorded nonfatal suicide attempts (SAs). Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study with prospective observational design. Data were collected from May 2011 to February 2013. Participants were followed up through December 2014. Analyses were conducted from March to November 2018. A logistic regression model was used to assess risk for subsequent administratively recorded nonfatal SAs. A total of 3649 Regular Army soldiers in 3 Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (Army STARRS) surveys who reported lifetime SI were followed up for 18 to 45 months from baseline to assess administratively reported nonfatal SAs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome was administratively recorded nonfatal SAs between survey response and December 2014. Predictors were survey variables. Results: The 3649 survey respondents were 80.5% male and had a median (interquartile range) age of 29 (25-36) years (range, 18-55 years); 69.4% were white non-Hispanic, 14.6% were black, 9.0% were Hispanic, 7.0% were another racial/ethnic group. Sixty-five respondents had administratively recorded nonfatal SAs between survey response and December 2014. One additional respondent died by suicide without making a nonfatal SA but was excluded from analysis based on previous evidence that predictors are different for suicide death and nonfatal SAs. Significant risk factors were SI recency (odds ratio [OR], 7.2; 95% CI, 2.9-18.0) and persistence (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.8), positive screens for mental disorders (OR, 26.2; 95% CI, 6.1-112.0), and Army career characteristics (OR for junior enlisted rank, 30.0; 95% CI, 3.3-272.5 and OR for senior enlisted rank, 6.7; 95% CI, 0.8-54.9). Cross-validated area under the curve was 0.78. The 10% of respondents with highest estimated risk accounted for 39.2% of subsequent SAs. Conclusions and Relevance: Results suggest the feasibility of developing a clinically useful risk index for SA among soldiers with SI using a small number of self-report questions. If implemented, a continuous quality improvement approach should be taken to refine the structured question series.

Indexed as

Suicidal IdeationAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMilitary PersonnelProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSelf ReportSuicide, AttemptedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30874786
PMCPMC6484656
OpenAlexW2921881483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.