Cited by 593Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesEmergency and Acute Care StudiesGun Ownership and Violence Research

Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ): A Brief Instrument for the Pediatric Emergency Department

Open access
Horowitz, Lisa M., Bridge, Jeffrey A., Teach, Stephen J., Ballard, Elizabeth, Klima, Jennifer, Rosenstein, Donald L., Wharff, Elizabeth A., Ginnis, Katherine +3 more·2012·Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a brief screening instrument to assess the risk for suicide in pediatric emergency department patients. DESIGN: A prospective, cross-sectional instrument-development study evaluated 17 candidate screening questions assessing suicide risk in young patients. The Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire served as the criterion standard. SETTING: Three urban, pediatric emergency departments associated with tertiary care teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 524 patients aged 10 to 21 years who presented with either medical/surgical or psychiatric chief concerns to the emergency department between September 10, 2008, and January 5, 2011. MAIN EXPOSURES: Participants answered 17 candidate questions followed by the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the best-fitting combinations of screening questions for detecting elevated risk for suicide. RESULTS: A total of 524 patients were screened (344 medical/surgical and 180 psychiatric). Fourteen of the medical/surgical patients (4%) and 84 of the psychiatric patients (47%) were at elevated suicide risk on the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire. Of the 17 candidate questions, the best-fitting model comprised 4 questions assessing current thoughts of being better off dead, current wish to die, current suicidal ideation, and past suicide attempt. This model had a sensitivity of 96.9% (95% CI, 91.3-99.4), specificity of 87.6% (95% CI, 84.0-90.5), and negative predictive values of 99.7% (95% CI, 98.2-99.9) for medical/surgical patients and 96.9% (95% CI, 89.3-99.6) for psychiatric patients. CONCLUSIONS: A 4-question screening instrument, the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ), with high sensitivity and negative predictive value, can identify the risk for suicide in patients presenting to pediatric emergency departments.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.1276

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The ASQ is a 4-item suicide-specific tool that is easy to administer, validated in adults and adolescents, and highly sensitive in the pediatric emergency department.

    “Suicide-specific instruments include the 4-item Ask Suicidal-Screening Questions (ASQ); it is easy to administer, validated among adults and adolescents, and has high sensitivity in the pediatric ED population [67].”

    From Adolescent Suicide—Understanding Unique Risks and Opportunities for Trauma Centers to Recognize, Intervene, and Prevent a Leading Cause of Death (2022) · cites this paper as [67]

    The Results—Conclusions section describes the ASQ as a brief four-question tool for rapidly assessing suicide risk in pediatric EDs and reports high sensitivity. The Methods—Study Settings and Sample section limits participants to ages 10–21; the Results—Comment limitations also state that the ASQ was not administered to a validation cohort. Thus, this paper does not establish validation among adults generally. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The ASQ has high sensitivity and negative predictive value in determining suicide risk.

    “The ASQ,19 a 4/5-item measure with high sensitivity and negative predictive value in determining suicide risk, was adapted to repeatedly assess preadolescents’ experiences of suicidal thoughts over the prior week.”
  • Studies show the ASQ has high sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive validity, and can detect patients at risk for suicide that depression screening alone fails to identify.

    “Studies show the ASQ has high sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive validity, and that it can detect patients at risk for suicide that depression screening alone fails to identify.40-42”
  • A yes response or nonresponse to any ASQ initial question yields a positive suicide risk screen and prompts a fifth question to assess acuity.

    “A “yes” response or nonresponse to any of these questions results in a positive screening result for suicide risk, and prompts a fifth question to assess acuity.40”
  • The ASQ consists of four initial questions assessing suicide ideation and suicidal behavior to identify patients who may need further risk assessment.

    “The ASQ is comprised of 4 initial questions that assess suicide ideation and suicidal behavior to identify patients who may need further risk assessment.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Horowitz, L. M., Bridge, J. A., Teach, S. J., Ballard, E., Klima, J., Rosenstein, D. L., Wharff, E. A., Ginnis, K., Cannon, E., Joshi, P., & Pao, M.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Horowitz, Lisa M.
Venue
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
Published
2012-12-01
Volume
166
Issue
12
Pages
1170
ISSN
1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979187768
Cited by
593
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 77 · 2025: 95 · 2024: 80 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Nationwide Children's Hospital
  • Children's National Hospital
  • National Institutes of Health (Z99 MH999999)
  • Research Institute, Nationwide Children's Hospital
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K01 MH-69948, K01MH069948, ZIAMH002922)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Social Sciences › Health › Gun Ownership and Violence Research
Keywords
suicide risk screening, suicidal ideation, screening tool development, desire for death, young adults, psychiatric patients, medical-surgical patients
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Pediatrics, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sensitivity and Specificity, Suicide, Suicide, Attempted, Logistic Models, Risk Assessment, Young Adult, Suicidal Ideation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review