Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35150387›Full record

SynthesisCurrent psychiatry reports2022

Implicit Cognition Tests for the Assessment of Suicide Risk: a Systematic Review.

Manon Moreno, Luis Gutiérrez-Rojas, Alejandro Porras-Segovia

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current psychiatry reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Manon MorenoInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain. manon8410@gmail.com.
Luis Gutiérrez-RojasDepartment of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario Clínico San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
Alejandro Porras-SegoviaInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz · ESInstituto de Investigación Biosanitaria de Granada · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewSuicide risk assessment is a challenge in clinical practice. Implicit measures may present with advantages with respect to explicit methods, and therefore may be useful for the assessment of suicide risk. We conducted a systematic review of 2 databases (PubMed and EMBASE) about implicit tests that measure suicide risk to explore their validity and reliability. RECENT

findingsInitial research revealed 321 articles. After the selection process, 31 articles were included in the review. The most death-related implicit cognition test used was the Death/Suicide Implicit association test (D/S IAT), followed by the Suicide Stroop Task. The Suicide Affect Misattribution Procedure (S-AMP) and the Death version of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (D-IRAP) were also used. We found that the measures reviewed were generally valid for the assessment of past and future suicidal thoughts and behaviors, with statistically significant results regarding retrospective and prospective associations.

Indexed as

SuicideSuicide, AttemptedCognitionHumansReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSuicidal IdeationAssessmentCognitionImplicitSuicideSuicide attemptSuicide ideation

Identifiers

PMID35150387
PMCPMC8852938
OpenAlexW4211033033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.