CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 127Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deterministic learning and attempted suicide among older depressed individuals: Cognitive assessment using the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task

Open access
McGirr, Alexander, Dombrovski, Alexandre Y., Butters, Meryl A., Clark, Luke, Szanto, Katalin·2012·Journal of Psychiatric Research
DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.10.001PMC PMC3326354
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Late-life suicide is an under-investigated public health problem. Among the putative vulnerabilities for this complex multifactorial behaviour are deficits in cognitive control, an ability to integrate and prioritize multiple cognitive processes in order to flexibly adapt behaviour and meet situational demands. We investigated cognitive control during rule learning in a complex and changing environment in older individuals with suicide attempts of varying lethality.Method Ninety-three participants over the age of 60 (30 healthy controls, 29 depressed never suicidal, 20 low-lethality suicide attempters, 14 high-lethality suicide attempters) underwent structured clinical and cognitive assessments. Participants then completed the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), a well-studied task of cognitive control during rule learning.Results High-lethality attempters demonstrated a pattern of deficits involving poor conceptual reasoning, perseverative errors and total errors. Compared to low-lethality attempters and healthy controls, high-lethality attempters demonstrated poor conceptual reasoning, as well as increased rates of perseverative errors and total errors. Compared to non-suicidal depressed participants, high-lethality attempters also made more conceptual errors.Conclusion High-lethality suicide attempts among older people are associated with impaired cognitive control during rule learning as detected by the WCST. Our data suggest that impairment in cognitive control during rule learning may represent a vulnerability distinct from the impulsive diathesis, typically manifesting in young, low-lethality attempters. This vulnerability may contribute to the high incidence of serious or, often, fatal suicidal acts in old age.

Overview

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.jpsychires.2011.10.001

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Beck, 1979, Assessment of suicidal intention: a scale for suicidal ideation, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 47, 343, 10.1037/0022-006X.47.2.343 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–125 of 125

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
McGirr, A., Dombrovski, A. Y., Butters, M. A., Clark, L., & Szanto, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Dombrovski, Alexandre Y.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-02
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
226-232
ISSN
0022-3956 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.10.001
PMC
PMC3326354
OpenAlex
W2090435772
Cited by
127
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
7.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000005)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 05436, K23MH086620, K23MH070471, R01MH085651)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
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
late-life suicide, suicide attempts, older adults, depression, cognitive control, rule induction, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, conceptual reasoning, perseverative errors, lethality, cognitive vulnerability
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Depression, Female, Humans, Learning Disabilities, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Problem Solving, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Reinforcement, Psychology, Suicide, Attempted, Statistics, Nonparametric

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