Trial reportTrials2024
Development and preliminary evaluation of a suicidal risk assessment protocol in a randomised controlled trial using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).
Trial report in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParticipants in research trials often disclose severe depression symptoms, including thoughts of self-harm and suicidal ideation, in validated self-administered questionnaires such as the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). However, there is no standard protocol for responding to such disclosure, and the opportunity to support people at risk is potentially missed. We developed and evaluated a risk assessment protocol for the IBD-BOOST randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN71618461 09/09/2019).
methodsParticipants completed the PHQ-9 at baseline and 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. The trial database automatically alerted the research team to risk assess participants. Trial researchers, trained in the protocol, contacted participants by telephone, completed the risk assessment, and signposted participants to appropriate professional services.
resultsSeven hundred eighty participants were randomised in the trial; 41 required risk assessment. One participant declined assessment, so 40 risk assessments were completed. Twenty-four participants were assessed as low-risk and 16 participants as medium-risk, with 12 declaring previous suicide attempts. None were rated as high-risk. Trial participants expressed appreciation for being contacted, and all except two wished to receive information about professional support services. Trial risk assessors reported positive experiences of conducting the risk assessment with suggestions for improvement, which resulted in minor modifications to the protocol. DISCUSSION: Our evaluation demonstrated that it was viable for a research trial team to successfully conduct a risk-assessment protocol for trial participants reporting thoughts of self-harm, with training and support from senior colleagues. Resources are required for training and delivery, but it is not unduly onerous. Trial participants appeared to find completing the assessment acceptable.
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.