Risky Assessments: Participant Suicidality and Distress Associated with Research Assessments in a Treatment Study of Suicidal Behavior

Sarah K. Reynolds · Noam Lindenboim · Katherine Anne Comtois · Marsha Marie Linehan

100 citations0/0 files storedSuicide and Life-Threatening Behavior

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Suicide and Self-Harm Studies Ethics in Clinical Research Personality Disorders and Psychopathology

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine patterns of self-reported suicidality and distress during research assessments in a sample of 63 women meeting criteria for borderline personality disorder and current and chronic suicidality. The risk management protocol we used during the two-year study period (University of Washington Risk Assessment Protocol; UWRAP) is described. Results indicated that changes in suicidality following assessments were small and relatively infrequent, and were just as likely to reflect decreases in suicidality as increases (17.5% versus 16.4% of sessions, respectively). Further, longitudinal analyses indicated that changes in suicidality became increasingly rare over the course of the 2-year study. Ratings of distress were more changeable than suicidality, underscoring the need for separate measurement of these constructs when assessing risk. With the aid of the UWRAP, our assessors judged 15 participants as high-risk status in 28 assessment sessions (3.7% of all sessions). In comparison to the rest of the sample, these individuals were of significantly greater clinical severity as measured by the HRSD 17-item, GAF scores, number and severity of previous suicide attempts, and number of previous psychiatric hospitalizations. Low-intensity risk intervention strategies (e.g., validating participant's feelings) were typically sufficient to reduce risk in these participants. Overall, our findings indicate that research with highly suicidal individuals can be done safely with the use of well-trained assessors and an appropriate crisis management protocol.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 100 citations exist upstream.

References

1961An Inventory for Measuring Depression 1960A RATING SCALE FOR DEPRESSION 1984Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis 2006Two-Year Randomized Controlled Trial and Follow-up of Dialectical Behavior Therapy vs Therapy by Experts for Suicidal Behaviors and Borderline Personality Disorder 2006Suicide Attempt Self-Injury Interview (SASII): Development, reliability, and validity of a scale to assess suicide attempts and intentional self-injury.1991Fluoxetine and suicide: a meta-analysis of controlled trials of treatment for depression.2001Intervention research with persons at high risk for suicidality: safety and ethical considerations.

Cited by

2023Depression and Suicide Risk Screening 2012Suicide Risk Factors and Risk Assessment Tools: A Systematic Review 2013A Longitudinal Person-Centered Examination of Nonsuicidal Self-injury Among University Students 2018Perceived effectiveness of NSSI in achieving functions on severity and suicide risk 2015Does assessing suicidality frequently and repeatedly cause harm? A randomized control study.2020

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.