Cited by 78Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesMental Health Research TopicsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Naturalistic evaluation of suicidal ideation: variability and relation to attempt status

Witte, Tracy K., Fitzpatrick, Kathleen K., Warren, Keith L., Schatschneider, Christopher, Schmidt, Norman B.·2006·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

Suicidal ideation has been thought to have a relatively stable course across weeks and months. However, daily changes in levels of ideation have not been adequately examined despite the importance of potential variability clinically and conceptually. For example, it has been suggested that variability in suicidal ideation may become less closely tied to variability in other mood symptoms (e.g., depression, hopelessness) among individuals with multiple suicide attempts. The present report had two related goals: (1) to prospectively evaluate suicidal ideation and related mood symptoms, and (2) to determine whether suicide attempt status predicted a decreased association between ideation and other mood symptoms. Non-clinical participants (N=108) with varying levels of suicidal ideation and number of previous suicide attempts completed the beck hopelessness scale (BHS), beck depression inventory (BDI), and suicide probability scale (SPS) every day for 4 weeks. Findings suggested considerable variability in suicidal ideation, especially for multiple attempters. Multiple attempt status predicted a decreased association between suicidal ideation and depression, although the results were only marginally significant. These findings have implications for conceptual models of suicide risk as well as assessment and treatment of suicidal individuals.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2005.08.004

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Witte, T. K., Fitzpatrick, K. K., Warren, K. L., Schatschneider, C., & Schmidt, N. B.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Florida State University (US)
Corresponding author
Schmidt, Norman B.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-07
Volume
44
Issue
7
Pages
1029-1040
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2044491800
Cited by
78
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
suicidal ideation, daily variability, suicide attempts, depression, hopelessness, suicide risk, mood symptoms, suicide risk assessment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Affect, Mental Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Recurrence, Suicide, Attempted

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