Cited by 239Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesMental Health Research TopicsMental Health via Writing

Real-time assessment of suicidal thoughts and behaviors

Kleiman, Evan M, Nock, Matthew K·2018·Current Opinion in Psychology

Abstract

One of the greatest challenges to understanding, predicting, and preventing suicide is that we have never had the ability to observe and intervene upon them as they unfold in real-time. Recently developed real-time monitoring methods are creating new opportunities for scientific and clinical advances. For instance, recent real-time monitoring studies of suicidal thoughts show that they typically are episodic, with quick onset and short duration. Many known risk factors that predict changes in suicidal thoughts over months/years (e.g. hopelessness) do not predict changes over hours/days-highlighting the gap in our abilities for short-term prediction. Current and future studies using newer streams of data from smartphone sensors (e.g. GPS) and wearables (e.g. heart rate) are further expanding knowledge and clinical possibilities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.07.026

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • Studies showing considerable fluctuations in suicidal thoughts throughout the day suggest that the relative importance of reasons to die and reasons to live might also be subject to rapid changes.

    “Furthermore, studies showing considerable fluctuations in suicidal thoughts throughout the day (2, 40–42) suggest that the relative importance of reasons to die and reasons to live might also be subject to rapid changes.”
  • When active suicidal ideation is measured 10 times a day across seven days, 36% of the variance is accounted for by within-person variability.

    “Hallensleben and colleagues (2) could demonstrate that if measured 10 times a day across seven days, 36% of the variance in active suicidal ideation is accounted for by within-person-variability (see also e.g., 41, 42).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kleiman, E. M., & Nock, M. K.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Kleiman, Evan M
Venue
Current Opinion in Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-08
Volume
22
Pages
33-37
ISSN
2352-250X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2737155082
Cited by
239
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
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 › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
Keywords
suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, real-time monitoring, suicide prevention, short-term forecasting, hopelessness, smartphone sensors, GPS, wearable devices, heart rate
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Wearable Electronic Devices, Humans, Time Factors, 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