Cited by 146Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesEmergency and Acute Care StudiesInjury Epidemiology and Prevention

Suicide Risk Screening in Pediatric Hospitals: Clinical Pathways to Address a Global Health Crisis

Open access
Brahmbhatt, Khyati, Kurtz, Brian P., Afzal, Khalid I., Giles, Lisa L., Kowal, Elizabeth D., Johnson, Kyle P., Lanzillo, Elizabeth, Pao, Maryland +2 more·2019·Psychosomatics

Abstract

Background Youth suicide is on the rise worldwide. Most suicide decedents received healthcare services in the year before killing themselves. Standardized workflows for suicide risk screening in pediatric hospitals using validated tools can help with timely and appropriate intervention, while attending to The Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert 56.Objective Here we describe the first attempt to generate clinical pathways for patients presenting to pediatric emergency departments (EDs) and inpatient medical settings.Methods The workgroup reviewed available evidence and generated a series of steps to be taken to feasibly screen medical patients presenting to hospitals. When evidence was limited, expert consensus was used. A standardized, iterative approach was utilized to create clinical pathways. Stakeholders reviewed initial drafts. Feedback was incorporated into the final pathway.Results Clinical pathways were created for suicide risk screening in pediatric EDs and inpatient medical/surgical units. The pathway outlines a 3-tiered screening process utilizing the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions for initial screening, followed by a brief suicide safety assessment to determine if a full suicide risk assessment is warranted. This essential step helps conserve resources and decide upon appropriate interventions for each patient who screens positive. Detailed implementation guidelines along with scripts for provider training are included.Conclusion Youth suicide is a significant public health problem. Clinical pathways can empower hospital systems by providing a guide for feasible and effective suicide risk-screening implementation by using validated tools to identify patients at risk and apply appropriate interventions for those who screen positive. Outcomes assessment is essential to inform future iterations.

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.psym.2018.09.003

Cites

26 of 26 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?

  • Disposition based on screening alone can fail to respond appropriately to real suicide risk and result in inefficient use of resources.

    “Once a patient screens positive for suicide risk, a follow-up assessment is a critical best practice, as disposition based on screening alone can fail to respond appropriately to real suicide risk and result in inefficient use of resources.”
  • The SAFE-T has frequently been used in primary care training and practice, though it was not included as a suggested suicide risk assessment tool by the AACAP PaCC Workgroup.

    “The SAFE-T has frequently been used in primary care training and practice, though was not included as a suggested suicide risk assessment tool by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) Pathways in Clinical Care (PaCC) Workgroup.50”

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. [9]Sentinel Event Alert 56: Detecting and treating suicide ideation in all settings. A complimentary publication of The Joint Commission. 2016(56). 26915165
  2. [18]Waynik ISA, Bode R, Engel R, A Path to Successful Pathway Development. [lecture] Pediatric Hospital Medicine Annual Conference Chicago, 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brahmbhatt, K., Kurtz, B. P., Afzal, K. I., Giles, L. L., Kowal, E. D., Johnson, K. P., Lanzillo, E., Pao, M., Plioplys, S., & Horowitz, L. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Horowitz, Lisa M.
Venue
Psychosomatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
60
Issue
1
Pages
1-9
ISSN
0033-3182 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2894354536
Cited by
146
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
13.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychosomatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry's 2017 Abramson Fund (ZIA MH002922-10)
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
Keywords
youth suicide, suicide risk screening, children's hospitals, care pathways, pediatric emergency department, suicide risk assessment, Ask Suicide-Screening Questions, suicide prevention, provider training, implementation guidelines
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Adolescent, Emergency Service, Hospital, Hospitalization, Hospitals, Pediatric, Humans, Mass Screening, Psychiatry, Referral and Consultation, Global Health, Risk Assessment, Critical Pathways, Workflow

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