Cited by 113Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesEmergency and Acute Care StudiesHealth Policy Implementation Science

The emergency department safety assessment and follow-up evaluation (ED-SAFE): method and design considerations

Open access
Boudreaux, Edwin D., Miller, Ivan, Goldstein, Amy B., Sullivan, Ashley F., Allen, Michael H., Manton, Anne P., Arias, Sarah A., Camargo, Carlos A.·2013·Contemporary Clinical Trials

Abstract

Background Due to the concentration of individuals at-risk for suicide, an emergency department visit represents an opportune time for suicide risk screening and intervention.Purpose The Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation (ED-SAFE) uses a quasi-experimental, interrupted time series design to evaluate whether (1) a practical approach to universally screening ED patients for suicide risk leads to improved detection of suicide risk and (2) a multi-component intervention delivered during and after the ED visit improves suicide-related outcomes.Methods This paper summarizes the ED-SAFE's study design and methods within the context of considerations relevant to effectiveness research in suicide prevention and pertinent human participants concerns. 1440 suicidal individuals, from 8 general ED's nationally will be enrolled during three sequential phases of data collection (480 individuals/phase): (1) Treatment as Usual; (2) Universal Screening; and (3) Intervention. Data from the three phases will inform two separate evaluations: Screening Outcome (Phases 1 and 2) and Intervention (Phases 2 and 3). Individuals will be followed for 12 months. The primary study outcome is a composite reflecting completed suicide, attempted suicide, aborted or interrupted attempts, and implementation of rescue procedures during an outcome assessment.Conclusions While 'classic' randomized control trials (RCT) are typically selected over quasi-experimental designs, ethical and methodological issues may make an RCT a poor fit for complex interventions in an applied setting, such as the ED. ED-SAFE represents an innovative approach to examining the complex public health issue of suicide prevention through a multi-phase, quasi-experimental design embedded in 'real world' clinical settings.

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 · 10.1016/j.cct.2013.05.008

Cites

25 of 25 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?

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
Boudreaux, E. D., Miller, I., Goldstein, A. B., Sullivan, A. F., Allen, M. H., Manton, A. P., Arias, S. A., & Camargo, C. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
  • Butler Hospital (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • VA Rocky Mountain Network (US)
  • Cape Cod Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Boudreaux, Edwin D.
Venue
Contemporary Clinical Trials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-09
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
14-24
ISSN
1551-7144 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2024562192
Cited by
113
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5
FWCI
7.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Contemporary Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Network (American Medical Association) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (U01MH088278)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
suicide risk screening, emergency department, universal screening, suicide prevention, complex interventions, interrupted time series design, quasi-experimental design, suicide attempts, suicide mortality, follow-up evaluation
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Mental Disorders, Emergency Service, Hospital, Health Services Research, Humans, Mass Screening, Mental Health, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Research Design, Suicide

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