Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34661661›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Evaluation of the Recovery Engagement and Coordination for Health-Veterans Enhanced Treatment Suicide Risk Modeling Clinical Program in the Veterans Health Administration.

John F McCarthy, Samantha A Cooper, Kallisse R Dent, Aaron E Eagan, Bridget B Matarazzo, Claire M Hannemann, Mark A Reger, Sara J Landes, Jodie A Trafton, Michael Schoenbaum and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Life events extraction from healthcare notes for veteran acute suicide risk prediction.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

John F McCarthyOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
Samantha A CooperOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
Kallisse R DentOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
Aaron E EaganOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
Bridget B MatarazzoRocky Mountain Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, Department of Veterans Affairs, Aurora, Colorado.
Claire M HannemannOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
Mark A RegerVA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington.
Sara J LandesSouth Central Mental Illness Research Education Clinical Center, Department of Veterans Affairs, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Jodie A TraftonOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
Michael SchoenbaumNational Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Ira R KatzOffice of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, District of Columbia.
New York State Office of Mental Health · USMental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Centers · USNational Institute of Mental Health · USVA Puget Sound Health Care System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented a national clinical program using a suicide risk prediction algorithm, Recovery Engagement and Coordination for Health-Veterans Enhanced Treatment (REACH VET), in which clinicians facilitate care enhancements for individuals identified in local top 0.1% suicide risk tiers. Evaluation studies are needed. Objective: To determine associations with treatment engagement, health care utilization, suicide attempts, safety plan documentation, and 6-month mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used triple differences analyses comparing 6-month changes in outcomes after vs before program entry for individuals entering the REACH VET program (March 2017-December 2018) vs a similarly identified top 0.1% suicide risk tier cohort from prior to program initiation (March 2014-December 2015), adjusting for trends across subthreshold cohorts. Subcohort analyses (including individuals from March 2017-June 2018) evaluated difference-in-differences for cause-specific mortality using death certificate data. The subthreshold cohorts included individuals in the top 0.3% to 0.1% suicide risk tier, below the threshold for REACH VET eligibility, from the concurrent REACH VET period and from the pre-REACH VET period. Data were analyzed from December 2019 through September 2021. Exposures: REACH VET-designated clinicians treatment reevaluation and outreach for care enhancements, including safety planning, increased monitoring, and interventions to enhance coping. Main Outcomes and Measures: Process outcomes included VHA scheduled, completed, and missed appointments; mental health visits; and safety plan documentation and documentation within 6 months for individuals without plans within the prior 2 years. Clinical outcomes included mental health admissions, emergency department visits, nonfatal suicide attempts, and all-cause, suicide, and nonsuicide external-cause mortality. Results: A total of 173 313 individuals (mean [SD] age, 51.0 [14.7] years; 161 264 [93.1%] men and 12 049 [7.0%] women) were included in analyses, including 40 816 individuals eligible for REACH VET care and 36 604 individuals from the pre-REACH VET period in the top 0.1% of suicide risk. The REACH VET intervention was associated with significant increases in completed outpatient appointments (adjusted triple difference [ATD], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.55) and proportion of individuals with new safety plans (ATD, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.10) and reductions in mental health admissions (ATD, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.05), emergency department visits (ADT, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.06 to -0.01), and suicide attempts (ADT, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.06 to -0.03). Subcohort analyses did not identify differences in suicide or all-cause mortality (eg, age-and-sex-adjusted difference-in-difference for suicide mortality, 0.0007; 95% CI, -0.0006 to 0.0019). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that REACH VET implementation was associated with greater treatment engagement and new safety plan documentation and fewer mental health admissions, emergency department visits, and suicide attempts. Clinical programs using risk modeling may be effective tools to support care enhancements and risk reduction.

Indexed as

Suicide PreventionAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProgram EvaluationSuicideUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans AffairsVeterans

Identifiers

PMID34661661
PMCPMC8524305
OpenAlexW3207057434

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.