Cited by 77Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Entrapment and suicide risk: The development of the 4-item Entrapment Scale Short-Form (E-SF)

Open access
De Beurs, Derek, Cleare, Seonaid, Wetherall, Karen, Eschle-Byrne, Sarah, Ferguson, Eamonn, B O'Connor, Daryl, C O'Connor, Rory·2020·Psychiatry Research

Abstract

Evidence suggests that suicidal behaviour arises from one's attempt to escape from unbearable situations or unbearable thoughts and feelings. These feelings of entrapment are usually assessed via the 16-item Entrapment Scale, but this is too long for routine use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to develop a brief version of the full scale that reliably assesses entrapment. We used data collected from a clinical sample (n = 497) of patients following hospital-treated self-harm and a population-based sample (n = 3457) of young adults. Four items were selected that had both the highest factor loading and discriminatory parameters and that covered the theoretical constructs of internal and external entrapment. Correlations between the 4-item short-form and the 16-item full scale were nearly perfect (0.94 for the clinical sample, 0.97 for the population-based sample). When comparing the correlations between the short-form and the full scale with other clinical and psychological scales, the correlations were nearly identical. The 4-item Entrapment Scale Short-Form (E-SF) will provide very comparable information about entrapment for each respondent as the full scale will do. However, its brevity will increase the likelihood that the assessment of entrapment will be implemented into everyday clinical practice.

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.psychres.2020.112765

Cites

30 of 30 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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Williams, J.M.G., 1997. Cry of Pain. Penguin, Harmondsworth.
  2. Organization, World Health, 2014. Preventing Suicing: A Global Imperative. WHO. World Health Organisation, Geneve. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470774120. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
De Beurs, D., Cleare, S., Wetherall, K., Eschle-Byrne, S., Ferguson, E., B O'Connor, D., & C O'Connor, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-02
Volume
284
Pages
112765
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2998996553
Cited by
77
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • ZonMw
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
entrapment, suicide risk, scale development, self-harm, young adults, suicidal behavior, clinical evaluation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Scotland, Reproducibility of Results, Self-Injurious Behavior, Principal Component Analysis, 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