TY  - JOUR
PY  - 2016//
TI  - Attentional bias toward suicide-relevant information in suicide attempters: a cross-sectional study and a meta-analysis
JO  - Journal of affective disorders
A1  - Richard-Devantoy, Stéphane
A1  - Ding, Yang
A1  - Turecki, Gustavo
A1  - Jollant, Fabrice
SP  - 101
EP  - 108
VL  - 196
IS  - 
N2  - OBJECTIVE: Previous studies using a modified Stroop test suggested that suicide attempters, in contrast to depressed patients with no suicidal history, display a particular attentional bias toward suicide-related cues. However, negative results have also been reported. In the present study, we collected new data and pooled them as part of a meta-analysis intended to shed further light on this question. <br><br>METHOD: We conducted 1) a cross-sectional study comparing performance on the modified Stroop task for suicide-related, positively-valenced and negatively-valenced words in 33 suicide attempters and 46 patient controls with a history of mood disorders; 2) a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies comparing performance on the modified Stroop task among patients with vs. without a history of suicidal acts in mood disorders. <br><br>RESULTS: The cross-sectional study showed no significant difference in interference scores for any type of words between suicide attempters and patient controls. A meta-analysis of four studies, including 233 suicide attempters and 768 patient controls, showed a significant but small attentional bias toward suicide-related words (Hedges'g=0.22, 95%CI [0.06-0.38], Z=2.73, p=0.006), but not negatively-valenced words (Hedges'g=0.06, 95%CI [-0.09-0.22], Z=0.77, p=0.4) in suicide attempters compared to patient controls. LIMITATIONS: Positively-valenced words and healthy controls could not be assessed in the meta-analysis. <br><br>CONCLUSION: Our data support a selective information-processing bias among suicide attempters. Indirect evidence suggests that this effect would be state-related and may be a cognitive component of the suicidal crisis. However, we could not conclude about the clinical utility of this Stroop version at this stage.<p />  <p>Language: en</p>
LA  - en
SN  - 0165-0327
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.046
ID  - ref1
ER  -