ArticleCommunity mental health journal2026
Implementing Digital Suicide Risk Screening in Behavioral Health: a Mixed-methods Study of Organizational Adaptation.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital behavioral health platforms extend clinical capabilities beyond traditional appointment-based care, but implementation challenges limit their routine use. Although validated suicide risk screening instruments exist and evidence suggests individuals provide honest responses in digital contexts, how behavioral health organizations implement asynchronous screening remains poorly understood. This exploratory study examined implementation experiences from nine behavioral health organizations that adopted digital suicide screening. Nine behavioral health organizations that implemented remote, asynchronous Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) screening completed post-implementation surveys. Using a mixed-methods approach combining Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis and VADER sentiment analysis, we identified implementation patterns, organizational adaptations, and provider attitudes across diverse service settings. Implementation challenges clustered into operational, technical, clinical, and systemic domains. Operational challenges involved workflow integration, staff training, and protocol development, while technical challenges included EHR integration, digital divide concerns, and alert volume management. Clinical challenges centered on screening quality, therapeutic rapport, and risk factor evaluation, while systemic challenges reflected resource constraints, crisis response protocols, and staff capacity. Provider attitudes evolved from initial anxiety and role uncertainty in early-stages to strong support among advanced-stage organizations, where 48% expressed very supportive and 32% expressed moderately supportive sentiments. Sentiment analysis of alert-workflow responses indicated generally positive attitudes across organizations (mean score = 0.24 on a scale of -1 to 1). Two preliminary frameworks emerged from analysis: the Service Delivery Ecosystem Framework describes context-specific adaptation patterns observed in this sample, and the Implementation Stage Framework characterizes common progression from initial rollout to mature implementation. These findings offer preliminary considerations for organizations planning digital suicide screening integration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42068516What 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.