Distinguishing veterans with suicidal ideation from suicide attempt history: The role of emotion reactivity.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-05 DOI:10.1111/sltb.12744
Molly Gromatsky, Emily R Edwards, Sarah R Sullivan, Marianne Goodman, Erin A Hazlett
{"title":"Distinguishing veterans with suicidal ideation from suicide attempt history: The role of emotion reactivity.","authors":"Molly Gromatsky,&nbsp;Emily R Edwards,&nbsp;Sarah R Sullivan,&nbsp;Marianne Goodman,&nbsp;Erin A Hazlett","doi":"10.1111/sltb.12744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Growing evidence suggests emotion reactivity-sensitivity and intensity of emotional experience-may represent a diathesis for suicide risk. However, our understanding of its ability to differentiate risk for suicidal ideation (SI) from suicide attempt (SA) is limited.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This study compares Veterans with SI (n = 81) to Veterans with SA (n = 177) history on factors relevant to emotion reactivity to determine which variable(s) best differentiate groups. Variables examined are multimodal: (a) self-report: childhood trauma, combat exposure; (b) clinician-assessed: non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), structured diagnostic interview of psychopathology; and (c) psychophysiological: affect-modulated startle (AMS; proxy for amygdala reactivity and emotion reactivity) to unpleasant pictures was examined in a subset (n = 90).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>SA history was independently predicted by NSSI history, MDD, PTSD, and SUD diagnosis. Childhood trauma and combat exposure did not differentiate groups. The composite risk index demonstrated good accuracy (AUC=0.71, sensitivity=0.90, specificity=0.49). Only AMS independently predicted SA history when added to the model and accuracy was improved (AUC=0.82, sensitivity=0.85, specificity=0.56).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NSSI history, MDD, PTSD, and SUD diagnosis may be salient risk factors for this population. However, emotion reactivity is a more parsimonious predictor of SA history among Veterans suggesting it is an important treatment target among Veterans with SI.</p>","PeriodicalId":39684,"journal":{"name":"Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior","volume":"51 3","pages":"572-585"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/sltb.12744","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12744","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: Growing evidence suggests emotion reactivity-sensitivity and intensity of emotional experience-may represent a diathesis for suicide risk. However, our understanding of its ability to differentiate risk for suicidal ideation (SI) from suicide attempt (SA) is limited.

Method: This study compares Veterans with SI (n = 81) to Veterans with SA (n = 177) history on factors relevant to emotion reactivity to determine which variable(s) best differentiate groups. Variables examined are multimodal: (a) self-report: childhood trauma, combat exposure; (b) clinician-assessed: non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), structured diagnostic interview of psychopathology; and (c) psychophysiological: affect-modulated startle (AMS; proxy for amygdala reactivity and emotion reactivity) to unpleasant pictures was examined in a subset (n = 90).

Results: SA history was independently predicted by NSSI history, MDD, PTSD, and SUD diagnosis. Childhood trauma and combat exposure did not differentiate groups. The composite risk index demonstrated good accuracy (AUC=0.71, sensitivity=0.90, specificity=0.49). Only AMS independently predicted SA history when added to the model and accuracy was improved (AUC=0.82, sensitivity=0.85, specificity=0.56).

Conclusion: NSSI history, MDD, PTSD, and SUD diagnosis may be salient risk factors for this population. However, emotion reactivity is a more parsimonious predictor of SA history among Veterans suggesting it is an important treatment target among Veterans with SI.

区分退伍军人自杀意念与自杀企图史:情绪反应的作用。
越来越多的证据表明,情绪反应——情绪体验的敏感性和强度——可能代表了自杀风险的一种素质。然而,我们对其区分自杀意念(SI)和自杀企图(SA)风险的能力的理解是有限的。方法:本研究比较有SI病史的退伍军人(n = 81)和有SA病史的退伍军人(n = 177)的情绪反应相关因素,以确定哪些变量最能区分群体。研究的变量是多模态的:(a)自我报告:童年创伤、战斗经历;(b)临床评估:非自杀式自伤(NSSI),结构化的精神病理学诊断访谈;(c)心理生理学:影响调节惊吓(AMS);在一个子集(n = 90)中检查了杏仁核反应和情绪反应的代理。结果:SA病史与自伤史、MDD、PTSD、SUD诊断有独立预测关系。童年创伤和战斗经历并没有区分群体。综合风险指数具有较好的准确性(AUC=0.71,敏感性=0.90,特异性=0.49)。当加入模型时,只有AMS独立预测SA病史,准确性得到提高(AUC=0.82,敏感性=0.85,特异性=0.56)。结论:自伤史、重度抑郁症、创伤后应激障碍和SUD诊断可能是该人群的重要危险因素。然而,情绪反应是退伍军人SA病史的一个更简洁的预测因子,这表明它是退伍军人SI的一个重要治疗目标。
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
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.10%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: An excellent resource for researchers as well as students, Social Cognition features reports on empirical research, self-perception, self-concept, social neuroscience, person-memory integration, social schemata, the development of social cognition, and the role of affect in memory and perception. Three broad concerns define the scope of the journal: - The processes underlying the perception, memory, and judgment of social stimuli - The effects of social, cultural, and affective factors on the processing of information - The behavioral and interpersonal consequences of cognitive processes.
×
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