Cited by 47Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

Mediators of a Culturally-Sensitive Intervention for Suicidal African American Women

Open access
Zhang, Huaiyu, Neelarambam, Kiranmayi, Schwenke, Tomina J., Rhodes, Miesha N., Pittman, Delishia M., Kaslow, Nadine J.·2013·Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings

Abstract

This study explored intervention outcomes and mechanisms that could help explain why low-income, African American women with a history of intimate partner abuse and suicide attempt improve in response to a culturally-informed intervention, the Grady Nia Project. Specifically, the investigation examined whether or not the intervention had effects on the women and whether or not spiritual well-being and coping mediated the effects of the intervention on suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. In this randomized controlled clinical trial, data from 89 women who completed both pre- and post-intervention assessments were analyzed. During the post-intervention follow-up, women in the active intervention group reported lower levels of suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms and higher levels of existential well-being and adaptive coping skills than those women randomized to the treatment as usual group. However, only existential well-being was found to mediate treatment effects on suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. Religious well-being, as well as adaptive and maladaptive coping, did not serve a mediational function. These findings highlight the importance of designing and implementing culturally-sensitive and evidence-based strategies that enhance existential well-being in this population.

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 · 10.1007/s10880-013-9373-0

Cites

79 of 79 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?

  • Group psychotherapies reduced suicidal ideation in 5 of 10 studies and suicide in one study, but none reported reducing nonfatal suicide attempts.

    “Group psychotherapies reduced suicidal ideation in 5/10 studies(100–109) and suicide in one,(100) but none reported reducing nonfatal suicide attempts (Table S3c).”

    From Improving Suicide Prevention Through Evidence-Based Strategies: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [104]

    The Discussion (Intervention Effects; page unavailable) reports reduced suicidal ideation after an empowerment-based group intervention compared with standard care. The Method (Procedure; page unavailable) identifies suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms as the two primary outcomes; this paper does not report a reduction in suicide deaths or establish the citing sentence’s counts across ten studies. It also does not report a reduction in nonfatal suicide attempts. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 1

  1. Ellison CG Hummer R Religion, family, and health: Population-based research in the United States 2010 Rutgers University Press New Brunswick, NJ

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, H., Neelarambam, K., Schwenke, T. J., Rhodes, M. N., Pittman, D. M., & Kaslow, N. J.
Affiliations
  • Grady Memorial Hospital (US)
  • Georgia State University (US)
  • Lewis & Clark College (US)
Corresponding author
Kaslow, Nadine J.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings
Published
2013-07-18
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
401-414
ISSN
  • 1068-9583 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3572
OpenAlex
W2050569742
Cited by
47
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
5.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh078002-05)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • U.S. Public Health Service (R49 CCR421767-01)
  • National Institute on Aging
  • National Institute of Mental Health (1R01MH078002- 01A2, R01 MH078002)
  • National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
suicidal ideation, African American women, intimate partner violence, suicide attempt history, culturally sensitive interventions, existential well-being, spiritual well-being, religious well-being, coping, depressive symptoms, mediation, low-income women, suicide prevention
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Adaptation, Psychological, Black or African American, Depression, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Poverty, Risk Factors, Spouse Abuse, Suicide, Urban Population, Program Evaluation, Spirituality, Cultural Competency

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