{"title":"改进自杀意念的描述性报告:对综合指标的呼吁","authors":"Samuel McKay , Matthew J. Spittal","doi":"10.1016/j.jadr.2025.100953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Suicidal ideation is a critical risk factor and intervention target in suicide prevention research, yet its descriptive reporting remains inconsistent. Most studies report prevalence rates or mean scores, often omitting the conditional mean, the average score specifically among those experiencing suicidal ideation. This limits our ability to assess the true severity of ideation in affected populations and hampers cross-study comparability. We propose a standardised approach to descriptive reporting incorporating three key metrics: overall mean, conditional mean, and prevalence rate. These metrics provide a more comprehensive picture of the extent, severity, and prevalence of suicidal ideation. Where only categorical responses are available, we recommend reporting both prevalence and the full breakdown of response categories to preserve interpretability. The adoption of these standards would improve the precision of meta-analyses, enable more meaningful comparisons across studies, and support the development of targeted, evidence-based interventions. We call on researchers, journal editors, and reviewers to implement this reporting standard to strengthen the empirical foundation of suicide prevention efforts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":52768,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Affective Disorders Reports","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100953"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving descriptive reporting of suicidal ideation: A call for comprehensive metrics\",\"authors\":\"Samuel McKay , Matthew J. Spittal\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jadr.2025.100953\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Suicidal ideation is a critical risk factor and intervention target in suicide prevention research, yet its descriptive reporting remains inconsistent. Most studies report prevalence rates or mean scores, often omitting the conditional mean, the average score specifically among those experiencing suicidal ideation. This limits our ability to assess the true severity of ideation in affected populations and hampers cross-study comparability. We propose a standardised approach to descriptive reporting incorporating three key metrics: overall mean, conditional mean, and prevalence rate. These metrics provide a more comprehensive picture of the extent, severity, and prevalence of suicidal ideation. Where only categorical responses are available, we recommend reporting both prevalence and the full breakdown of response categories to preserve interpretability. The adoption of these standards would improve the precision of meta-analyses, enable more meaningful comparisons across studies, and support the development of targeted, evidence-based interventions. We call on researchers, journal editors, and reviewers to implement this reporting standard to strengthen the empirical foundation of suicide prevention efforts.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Affective Disorders Reports\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100953\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Affective Disorders Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666915325000836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Affective Disorders Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666915325000836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
Improving descriptive reporting of suicidal ideation: A call for comprehensive metrics
Suicidal ideation is a critical risk factor and intervention target in suicide prevention research, yet its descriptive reporting remains inconsistent. Most studies report prevalence rates or mean scores, often omitting the conditional mean, the average score specifically among those experiencing suicidal ideation. This limits our ability to assess the true severity of ideation in affected populations and hampers cross-study comparability. We propose a standardised approach to descriptive reporting incorporating three key metrics: overall mean, conditional mean, and prevalence rate. These metrics provide a more comprehensive picture of the extent, severity, and prevalence of suicidal ideation. Where only categorical responses are available, we recommend reporting both prevalence and the full breakdown of response categories to preserve interpretability. The adoption of these standards would improve the precision of meta-analyses, enable more meaningful comparisons across studies, and support the development of targeted, evidence-based interventions. We call on researchers, journal editors, and reviewers to implement this reporting standard to strengthen the empirical foundation of suicide prevention efforts.