Cited by 80Treatment of Major DepressionSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Assessing measures of suicidal ideation in clinical trials with a rapid-acting antidepressant

Open access
Ballard, Elizabeth D., Luckenbaugh, David A., Richards, Erica M., Walls, Tessa L., Brutsché, Nancy E., Ameli, Rezvan, Niciu, Mark J., Vande Voort, Jennifer L. +1 more·2015·Journal of Psychiatric Research

Abstract

Rapid reduction of suicidal thoughts is critical for treating suicidal patients. Clinical trials evaluating these treatments require appropriate measurement. Key methodological issues include: 1) the use of single or multi-item assessments, and 2) evaluating whether suicidal ideation measures can track rapid change over time. The current study presents data from two randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trials evaluating ketamine in individuals with treatment-resistant depression (n = 60). Participants were assessed for suicidal thoughts using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Scale for Suicidal Ideation (SSI) at eight time points over three days. Assessments were compared using correlational analyses and effect sizes at 230 min and three days after ketamine infusion. Linear mixed models evaluated change in ideation across all time points. The HAM-D and MADRS suicide items demonstrated correlations of r > .80 with the first five items of the SSI (SSI5). On linear mixed models, an effect for ketamine was found for the HAM-D, MADRS, BDI items, and SSI5 (p < .001), but not for the full SSI (p = .88), which suggests a limited ability to assess change over time in patients with low levels of suicidal thoughts. Taken together, the results suggest that repeated suicidal assessments over minutes to days appear to detect improvement in suicidal thoughts after ketamine infusion compared to placebo. The MADRS suicide item, BDI suicide item, and SSI5 may be particularly sensitive to rapid changes in suicidal thoughts.

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.2015.06.003

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?

  • A discrepancy was observed between the five-item SSI and the longer version over repeated assessments.

    “While there was overall agreement between measures, a particular discrepancy was observed between the five-item SSI (screening items administered to every participant) and the longer version (five screening items plus 17 additional items only administered if the participant reached a particular score) over repeated assessments.”

    From New methods for assessing rapid changes in suicide risk (2021) · cites this paper as [28]

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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ballard, E. D., Luckenbaugh, D. A., Richards, E. M., Walls, T. L., Brutsché, N. E., Ameli, R., Niciu, M. J., Vande Voort, J. L., & Zarate, C. A.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Ballard, Elizabeth D.
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-09
Volume
68
Pages
68-73
ISSN
0022-3956 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2154057248
Cited by
80
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Brain and Behavior Research Foundation
  • Brain Research Foundation
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • National Institutes of Health (Z99 MH999999)
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
suicidal ideation, ketamine, treatment-resistant depression, rapid-acting antidepressants, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, measurement sensitivity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Antidepressive Agents, Bipolar Disorder, Clozapine, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Ketamine, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Statistics as Topic, Time Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Cross-Over Studies, Young Adult, 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