Predicting Suicide Acts Among Crisis Line Callers: Screening Recent Suicidal History or Using a Comprehensive Scale?

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Yi Yin, Yongsheng Tong, Liting Zhao, Xiaohong Li
{"title":"Predicting Suicide Acts Among Crisis Line Callers: Screening Recent Suicidal History or Using a Comprehensive Scale?","authors":"Yi Yin, Yongsheng Tong, Liting Zhao, Xiaohong Li","doi":"10.1080/13811118.2025.2507601","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Crisis lines face challenges in identifying individuals at high suicide risk. We aimed to compare two routine methods for predicting suicide acts at different time points.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective cohort study, we recruited and monitored 8859 callers from the Beijing Psychological Support Hotline. We evaluated their suicide risk through two strategies during their index calls: (a) one screening about suicidal ideation, plan, or behavior in the last two weeks and (b) the Comprehensive Suicidal Risk Assessment Scale, which included more risk factors, such as depression, hopelessness, and psychological distress. We monitored their suicidal behaviors for one year through telephone interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of callers who attempted suicide or died by suicide within 24 hours (1.2%), 30 days (3.8%), 180 days (6.9%), or 365 days (9.1%) was: 102, 341, 615, and 802, respectively. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive predictive values for screening for recent suicidal history were higher than those of the comprehensive scale for predicting suicidal acts within each time point. However, with the increasing duration of the follow-up, the screening had a poorer predictive ability than the comprehensive scale (predicting suicide acts within 270 days: Youden's index, 34.5% vs. 36.2%.; the Area under the Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve, 67.2% vs. 68.1%), especially among those without a history of suicide attempts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Screening for recent suicidal history is valid for predicting suicidal acts within six months; however, screening is insufficient for predicting long-term suicidal acts compared to assessing more suicide risk factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":8325,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Suicide Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Suicide Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2025.2507601","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Crisis lines face challenges in identifying individuals at high suicide risk. We aimed to compare two routine methods for predicting suicide acts at different time points.

Methods: In this prospective cohort study, we recruited and monitored 8859 callers from the Beijing Psychological Support Hotline. We evaluated their suicide risk through two strategies during their index calls: (a) one screening about suicidal ideation, plan, or behavior in the last two weeks and (b) the Comprehensive Suicidal Risk Assessment Scale, which included more risk factors, such as depression, hopelessness, and psychological distress. We monitored their suicidal behaviors for one year through telephone interviews.

Results: The number of callers who attempted suicide or died by suicide within 24 hours (1.2%), 30 days (3.8%), 180 days (6.9%), or 365 days (9.1%) was: 102, 341, 615, and 802, respectively. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive predictive values for screening for recent suicidal history were higher than those of the comprehensive scale for predicting suicidal acts within each time point. However, with the increasing duration of the follow-up, the screening had a poorer predictive ability than the comprehensive scale (predicting suicide acts within 270 days: Youden's index, 34.5% vs. 36.2%.; the Area under the Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve, 67.2% vs. 68.1%), especially among those without a history of suicide attempts.

Conclusions: Screening for recent suicidal history is valid for predicting suicidal acts within six months; however, screening is insufficient for predicting long-term suicidal acts compared to assessing more suicide risk factors.

预测危机热线呼叫者的自杀行为:筛选近期自杀史还是使用综合量表?
目的:危机热线在识别高自杀风险个体方面面临挑战。我们的目的是比较在不同时间点预测自杀行为的两种常规方法。方法:在这项前瞻性队列研究中,我们从北京心理支持热线招募并监测8859名来电者。我们通过两种策略来评估他们的自杀风险:(a)对过去两周的自杀想法、计划或行为进行筛查;(b)综合自杀风险评估量表,其中包括更多的风险因素,如抑郁、绝望和心理困扰。我们通过电话访谈对他们的自杀行为进行了一年的监控。结果:在24小时(1.2%)、30天(3.8%)、180天(6.9%)、365天(9.1%)内企图自杀或自杀身亡的来电者分别为:102人、341人、615人、802人。筛查近期自杀史的敏感性、特异性和阳性预测值均高于预测各时间点内自杀行为的综合量表。但随着随访时间的增加,该筛查对270天内自杀行为的预测能力较综合量表差:约登指数为34.5%比36.2%;接受者操作者特征曲线下面积(67.2%对68.1%),特别是在没有自杀企图史的人群中。结论:筛查近期自杀史可有效预测6个月内的自杀行为;然而,与评估更多自杀风险因素相比,筛查不足以预测长期自杀行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Archives of Suicide Research, the official journal of the International Academy of Suicide Research (IASR), is the international journal in the field of suicidology. The journal features original, refereed contributions on the study of suicide, suicidal behavior, its causes and effects, and techniques for prevention. The journal incorporates research-based and theoretical articles contributed by a diverse range of authors interested in investigating the biological, pharmacological, psychiatric, psychological, and sociological aspects of suicide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信