IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v61y2015i3p287-296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structured assessment of suicide risk in a psychiatric emergency service: Psychometric evaluation of the Nurses’ Global Assessment of Suicide Risk scale (NGASR)

Author

Listed:
  • Mark van Veen
  • Inge van Weeghel
  • Bauke Koekkoek
  • Arjan W Braam

Abstract

Background: Risk of suicide is notoriously difficult to assess, and no gold standard is available, in terms of an instrument of first choice. Many different instruments are in use, among which are some that are not properly psychometrically investigated. Aim: The aim of this study is to establish the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the Nurses’ Global Assessment of Suicide Risk scale (NGASR), and the feasibility of its use in assessing suicide risk. Therefore, our research questions are as follows: what is the reliability, validity, interpretability and feasibility of the NGASR? Methods: A psychometric study of acceptability, reliability and predictive validity among 252 patients making use of a concurrent instrument, the Suicide Intention Scale (SIS), concurrent assessment by a physician and 6-month follow-up. Results: Factor analysis identified five factors. Cronbach’s alpha was .45. Intraclass correlation was .92 (95% confidence interval (CI) = .85–.95). Association between total NGASR and SIS was substantial and significant ( B = 0.66, standard error of mean (SE) = 0.19, ß = .66, p = .003). NGASR total score had a significant and moderately strong association with judgement by a physician on ‘suicidal thoughts’ (odds ratio (OR) = 1.24, p =

Suggested Citation

  • Mark van Veen & Inge van Weeghel & Bauke Koekkoek & Arjan W Braam, 2015. "Structured assessment of suicide risk in a psychiatric emergency service: Psychometric evaluation of the Nurses’ Global Assessment of Suicide Risk scale (NGASR)," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 61(3), pages 287-296, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:61:y:2015:i:3:p:287-296
    DOI: 10.1177/0020764014543311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0020764014543311
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0020764014543311?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:sae:socpsy:v:61:y:2015:i:3:p:287-296. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.