@article{ref1,
title="Concurrent validity and reliability of suicide risk assessment instruments: a meta-analysis of 20 instruments across 27 international cohorts",
journal="Neuropsychology",
year="2023",
author="Campos, Adrian I. and van Velzen, Laura S. and Veltman, Dick J. and Pozzi, Elena and Ambrogi, Sonia and Ballard, Elizabeth D. and Banaj, Nerisa and Başgöze, Zeynep and Bellow, Sophie and Benedetti, Francesco and Bollettini, Irene and Brosch, Katharina and Canales-Rodríguez, Erick J. and Clarke-Rubright, Emily K. and Colic, Lejla and Connolly, Colm G. and Courtet, Philippe and Cullen, Kathryn R. and Dannlowski, Udo and Dauvermann, Maria R. and Davey, Christopher G. and Deverdun, Jérémy and Dohm, Katharina and Erwin-Grabner, Tracy and Goya-Maldonado, Roberto and Fani, Negar and Fortea, Lydia and Fuentes-Claramonte, Paola and Gonul, Ali Saffet and Gotlib, Ian H. and Grotegerd, Dominik and Harris, Mathew A. and Harrison, Ben J. and Haswell, Courtney C. and Hawkins, Emma L. and Hill, Dawson and Hirano, Yoshiyuki and Ho, Tiffany C. and Jollant, Fabrice and Jovanovic, Tanja and Kircher, Tilo and Klimes-Dougan, Bonnie and Le Bars, Emmanuelle and Lochner, Christine and McIntosh, Andrew M. and Meinert, Susanne and Mekawi, Yara and Melloni, Elisa and Mitchell, Philip and Morey, Rajendra A. and Nakagawa, Akiko and Nenadic, Igor and Olié, Emilie and Pereira, Fabricio and Phillips, Rachel D. and Piras, Fabrizio and Poletti, Sara and Pomarol-Clotet, Edith and Radua, Joaquim and Ressler, Kerry J. and Roberts, Gloria and Rodríguez-Cano, Elena and Sacchet, Matthew D. and Salvador, Raymond and Sandu, Anca-Larisa and Shimizu, Eiji and Singh, Aditya and Spalletta, Gianfranco and Steele, J. Douglas and Stein, Dan J. and Stein, Frederike and Stevens, Jennifer S. and Teresi, Giana I. and Uyar-Demir, Aslihan and van der Wee, Nic J. and van der Werff, Steven J. and van Rooij, Sanne J. H. and Vecchio, Daniela and Verdolini, Norma and Vieta, Eduard and Waiter, Gordon D. and Whalley, Heather and Whittle, Sarah L. and Yang, Tony T. and Zarate, Carlos A. and Thompson, Paul M. and Jahanshad, Neda and van Harmelen, Anne-Laura and Blumberg, Hilary P. and Schmaal, Lianne and Renteria, Miguel E.",
volume="37",
number="3",
pages="315-329",
abstract="OBJECTIVE: A major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used across cohorts may represent a limitation to pooling data in international consortia. <br><br>METHOD: Here, we examine this issue through two approaches: (a) an extensive literature search on the reliability and concurrent validity of the most commonly used instruments and (b) by pooling data (N ∼ 6,000 participants) from cohorts from the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics Through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Major Depressive Disorder and ENIGMA-Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviour working groups, to assess the concurrent validity of instruments currently used for assessing suicidal thoughts or behavior. <br><br>RESULTS: We observed moderate-to-high correlations between measures, consistent with the wide range (κ range: 0.15-0.97; r range: 0.21-0.94) reported in the literature. Two common multi-item instruments, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.83). Sensitivity analyses identified sources of heterogeneity such as the time frame of the instrument and whether it relies on self-report or a clinical interview. Finally, construct-specific analyses suggest that suicide ideation items from common psychiatric questionnaires are most concordant with the suicide ideation construct of multi-item instruments. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that multi-item instruments provide valuable information on different aspects of suicidal thoughts or behavior but share a modest core factor with single suicidal ideation items. Retrospective, multisite collaborations including distinct instruments should be feasible provided they harmonize across instruments or focus on specific constructs of suicidality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0894-4105",
doi="10.1037/neu0000850",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/neu0000850"
}