Author
Listed:
- Scott, M.
- Wilcox, H.
- Huo, Y.
- Turner, J.B.
- Fisher, P.
- Shaffer, D.
Abstract
Objectives. We examined the effects of a scoring algorithm change on the burden and sensitivity of a screen for adolescent suicide risk. Methods. The Columbia Suicide Screen was used to screen 641 high school students for high suicide risk (recent ideation or lifetime attempt and depression, or anxiety, or substance use), determined by subsequent blind assessment with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children. We compared the accuracy of different screen algorithms in identifying high-risk cases. Results. A screen algorithm comprising recent ideation or lifetime attempt or depression, anxiety, or substance-use problems set at moderate-severity level classed 35% of students as positive and identified 96% of high-risk students. Increasing the algorithm's threshold reduced the proportion identified to 24% and identified 92% of high-risk cases. Asking only about recent suicidal ideation or lifetime suicide attempt identified 17% of the students and 89% of high-risk cases. The proportion of nonsuicidal diagnosis-bearing students found with the 3 algorithms was 62%, 34%, and 12%, respectively. Conclusions. The Columbia Suicide Screen threshold can be altered to reduce the screen-positive population, saving costs and time while identifying almost all students at high risk for suicide.
Suggested Citation
Scott, M. & Wilcox, H. & Huo, Y. & Turner, J.B. & Fisher, P. & Shaffer, D., 2010.
"School-based screening for suicide risk: Balancing costs and benefits,"
American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(9), pages 1648-1652.
Handle:
RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2009.175224_2
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.175224
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2009.175224_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.