Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35275075›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Implementing Machine Learning Models for Suicide Risk Prediction in Clinical Practice: Focus Group Study With Hospital Providers.

Kate H Bentley, Kelly L Zuromski, Rebecca G Fortgang, Emily M Madsen, Daniel Kessler, Hyunjoon Lee, Matthew K Nock, Ben Y Reis, Victor M Castro, Jordan W Smoller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Predicting Next-Day Passive Suicidal Ideation in At-Risk Youth.Suicide & life-threatening behavior · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Using transfer learning to improve prediction of suicide risk in acute care hospitals.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Evaluating Machine Learning for Predicting Youth Suicidal Behavior Up to 1 Year After Contact With Mental-Health Specialty Care.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025
    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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kate H BentleyCenter for Precision Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6875-6440
Kelly L ZuromskiDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4798-898X
Rebecca G FortgangDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5388-3386
Emily M MadsenCenter for Precision Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4632-3027
Daniel KesslerDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5054-7982
Hyunjoon LeeCenter for Precision Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4694-7016
Matthew K NockDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6508-1145
Ben Y ReisHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9908-5523
Victor M CastroResearch Information Science and Computing, Mass General Brigham, Somerville, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7390-6354
Jordan W SmollerCenter for Precision Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0381-6334
Harvard University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USBoston Children's Hospital · USPolitical Research Associates · US

Funding

Digital Monitoring of Agitation for Short-Term Suicide Risk PredictionK23MH120436 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BENTLEY, KATE H. · 2019 to 2024
$1.0M
Biological/behavioral rhythms and suicidal behavior: A real-time monitoring studyK23MH120439 · NIMH · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI ZUROMSKI, KELLY · 2020 to 2023
$740k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH120436NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH120439
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterest in developing machine learning models that use electronic health record data to predict patients' risk of suicidal behavior has recently proliferated. However, whether and how such models might be implemented and useful in clinical practice remain unknown. To ultimately make automated suicide risk-prediction models useful in practice, and thus better prevent patient suicides, it is critical to partner with key stakeholders, including the frontline providers who will be using such tools, at each stage of the implementation process.

objectiveThe aim of this focus group study is to inform ongoing and future efforts to deploy suicide risk-prediction models in clinical practice. The specific goals are to better understand hospital providers' current practices for assessing and managing suicide risk; determine providers' perspectives on using automated suicide risk-prediction models in practice; and identify barriers, facilitators, recommendations, and factors to consider.

methodsWe conducted 10 two-hour focus groups with a total of 40 providers from psychiatry, internal medicine and primary care, emergency medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology departments within an urban academic medical center. Audio recordings of open-ended group discussions were transcribed and coded for relevant and recurrent themes by 2 independent study staff members. All coded text was reviewed and discrepancies were resolved in consensus meetings with doctoral-level staff.

resultsAlthough most providers reported using standardized suicide risk assessment tools in their clinical practices, existing tools were commonly described as unhelpful and providers indicated dissatisfaction with current suicide risk assessment methods. Overall, providers' general attitudes toward the practical use of automated suicide risk-prediction models and corresponding clinical decision support tools were positive. Providers were especially interested in the potential to identify high-risk patients who might be missed by traditional screening methods. Some expressed skepticism about the potential usefulness of these models in routine care; specific barriers included concerns about liability, alert fatigue, and increased demand on the health care system. Key facilitators included presenting specific patient-level features contributing to risk scores, emphasizing changes in risk over time, and developing systematic clinical workflows and provider training. Participants also recommended considering risk-prediction windows, timing of alerts, who will have access to model predictions, and variability across treatment settings.

conclusionsProviders were dissatisfied with current suicide risk assessment methods and were open to the use of a machine learning-based risk-prediction system to inform clinical decision-making. They also raised multiple concerns about potential barriers to the usefulness of this approach and suggested several possible facilitators. Future efforts in this area will benefit from incorporating systematic qualitative feedback from providers, patients, administrators, and payers on the use of these new approaches in routine care, especially given the complex, sensitive, and unfortunately still stigmatized nature of suicide risk.

Indexed as

implementationmachine learningmobile phonesuicide

Identifiers

PMID35275075
PMCPMC8956996
OpenAlexW4220749473

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.