Worst-point suicidal plans: a dimension of suicidality predictive of past suicide attempts and eventual death by suicide
Abstract
Among 440 psychiatric outpatients with current suicidal ideation, we examined the empirical distinction between the "plans" vs. "desire" dimensions of suicidality, focusing for conceptual and empirical reasons on a worst-point assessment strategy. Factor analyses were consistent with the distinction, but more importantly, among the current ideators included in this study, the worst-point "plans" dimension was the only predictor significantly related to both of two important indices, history of past attempt and eventual suicide. These findings bear on the trajectory of suicidal behavior over time, as well as inform the clinical assessment of suicidal patients.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Research has suggested that worst-point ideation may be a stronger predictor of subsequent suicide than current ideation.
“the lifetime period assesses the worst-point ideation, which research has suggested may be a stronger predictor of subsequent suicide than current ideation (7, 21).”
From The Columbia–Suicide Severity Rating Scale: Initial Validity and Internal Consistency Findings From Three Multisite Studies With Adolescents and Adults (2011) · cites this paper as [21]
Factor structure analyses of the Scale for Suicide Ideation have shown that certain clusters of items assessing plans and desire show differential prediction of past attempts and eventual suicide.
“Factor structure analyses of the Scale for Suicide Ideation have shown that certain clusters of items assessing “plans” and “desire” show differential prediction of past attempts and eventual suicide (21, 43).”
From The Columbia–Suicide Severity Rating Scale: Initial Validity and Internal Consistency Findings From Three Multisite Studies With Adolescents and Adults (2011) · cites this paper as [21]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 215
- Authors
- Joiner, T. E., Steer, R. A., Brown, G., Beck, A. T., Pettit, J. W., & Rudd, M. D.
- Affiliations
- Florida State University (US)
- University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (US)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Baylor University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Joiner, Thomas E
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1469-1480
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2008226856
- Cited by
- 215
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 6.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
- Keywords
- suicidal ideation, suicide planning, suicide mortality, psychiatric outpatients, suicide risk assessment
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Suicide, Suicide, Attempted, Risk Assessment
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
