ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
Comparison of two suicide screening instruments for identifying high-risk individuals in prison.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increased suicide rates in prison are a serious concern. Early identification of inmates at risk is a component of effective suicide prevention. The present study examined two suicide screening instruments in a sample of men in the Berlin, Germany, prison system (n = 289). The Screening for Initial Risk Assessment (SIRAS) identified significantly more high-risk inmates than the Vienna Instrument for Suicidality in Correctional Institutions (VISCI) (66 vs. 24). The results further show that the agreement in the classification was evident only in inmates with suicidal ideation, but was otherwise quite low. This can be explained by the fact that the instruments differ in terms of the risk factors taken into account. Finally, it was found that inmates classified as high risk received more monitoring and psychiatric or psychological support, which supports the construct validity of the instruments. As there were no deaths by suicide in the sample, no statistical information on the predictive validity of the instruments could be provided. Although research in this area is challenging, methodologically sound studies are needed to inform practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.