Cited by 74Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Cognitive inhibition in older high-lethality suicide attempters: Cognitive inhibition in older suicide attempters

Open access
Richard-Devantoy, Stéphane, Szanto, Katalin, Butters, Meryl A., Kalkus, Jan, Dombrovski, Alexandre Y.·2015·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: People who attempt suicide often display cognitive impairments, particularly poor cognitive control. Could poor cognitive control contribute to high suicide rates in old age? A component of cognitive control, cognitive inhibition-active suppression of task-irrelevant processing-is very sensitive to aging and has been linked to attempted suicide. We investigated cognitive inhibition in older high-lethality suicide attempters, closely resembling suicide victims, as well as low-lethality attempters, and control groups with and without depression and suicidal ideation. METHODS: A total of 102 participants aged 60 years and older (17 psychiatrically healthy control subjects, 38 depressed control subjects, 16 suicide ideators, 14 low-lethality suicide attempters, and 17 high-lethality suicide attempters) underwent comprehensive clinical and cognitive assessments. They completed the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Color-Word Interference Test, a validated modification of the Stroop test. RESULTS: High-lethality suicide attempters demonstrated a distinct pattern of cognitive inhibition deficits. Compared with psychiatrically healthy control subjects and suicide ideators, high-lethality attempters took longer to complete inhibition trials, even after accounting for potential confounding factors (age, education, Mini mental state examination score, information processing speed, and accuracy). Compared with non-suicidal depressed and healthy control subjects, low-lethality suicide attempters committed more uncorrected errors; however, this difference was not specific to the inhibition condition. CONCLUSIONS: Older suicide attempters are a cognitively heterogeneous group. Poor cognitive control in high-lethality attempters may undermine their ability to solve real-life problems, precipitating a catastrophic accumulation of stressors. Meanwhile, low-lethality attempters' poor performance may reflect a careless approach to the task or faulty monitoring.

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 · 10.1002/gps.4138

Cites

70 of 70 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?

  • Individuals at high risk of suicidal behavior experience difficulties in controlling the focus of their attention, and attempters demonstrate reduced cognitive inhibition compared to ideators.

    “In addition, individuals at high risk of suicidal behavior experience difficulties in controlling the focus of their attention, and attempters demonstrate reduced cognitive inhibition compared to ideators (Richard-Devantoy et al., 2015; Thompson and Ong, 2018).”

    From The Psychological Pathway to Suicide Attempts: A Strategy of Control Without Awareness (2021) · cites this paper as Richard-Devantoy et al., 2015

    The Results and Discussion report poorer cognitive inhibition in older high-lethality suicide attempters than in suicide ideators. The claim omits the age and attempt-lethality limits: the paper does not establish that attempters generally have reduced inhibition compared with ideators. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Reduced attentional control, including the ability to inhibit responses, would be interpreted from a PCT perspective as a reduced ability to sustain or shift awareness between goals.

    “Firstly, reduced attentional control, including the ability to inhibit responses (Richard-Devantoy et al., 2015; Thompson and Ong, 2018), would be interpreted from a PCT perspective as a reduced ability to sustain or shift awareness between goals (Mansell et al., 2012).”

    From The Psychological Pathway to Suicide Attempts: A Strategy of Control Without Awareness (2021) · cites this paper as Richard-Devantoy et al., 2015

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Beck AT Schuyler D Herman I 1974 Development of Suicidal Intent Scales Beck AT Resnik P Lettier AJ The Prediction of Suicide Bowie, Maryland Charles Press Publishing
  2. Butters MA Whyte EM Nebes RD Begley AE Dew MA Mulsant BH Zmuda MD Bhalla R Meltzer CC Pollock BG Reynolds CF 3rd Becker JT 2004b The nature and determinants of neuropsychological functioning in late-life depression Arch Gen Psychiatry 61 587 595 15184238
  3. Dombrovski AY Butters MA Reynolds CF 3rd Houck PR Clark L Mazumdar S Szanto K 2008b Cognitive performance in suicidal depressed elderly: preliminary report The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 16 109 115 18239196 PMC2671399
  4. Dombrovski AY Szanto K Siegle GJ Wallace ML Forman SD Sahakian B Reynolds CFr 3rd Clark L 2011b Lethal forethought: delayed reward discounting differentiates high- and low-lethality suicide attempts in old age Biol Psychiatry 70 138 144 21329911 PMC3125431
  5. First MB Spitzer RL 2002 Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Patient Edition with Psychotic Screen New York Biometrics Research Department, New York State Psychiatric Institute

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Richard-Devantoy, S., Szanto, K., Butters, M. A., Kalkus, J., & Dombrovski, A. Y.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychiatry and Douglas Mental Health University Institute, McGill Group for Suicide Studies; McGill University; Montréal Québec Canada
  • Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Department of Psychiatry; University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine; Pittsburgh PA USA
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Dombrovski, Alexandre Y.
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-05-12
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
274-283
ISSN
0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1944611748
Cited by
74
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3
FWCI
7.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (K23 MH086620, R01 MH085651)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
cognitive inhibition, suicide attempters, older adults, cognitive control, aging, depression, suicidal ideation, color-word interference, Stroop task, executive function, cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Aged, Analysis of Variance, Cognition Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Problem Solving, Suicide, Attempted, Case-Control Studies

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