Telephone contact with patients in the year after a suicide attempt: does it affect treatment attendance and outcome? A randomised controlled study
Abstract
Summary: Ambivalence to treatment and repeated suicidal behaviour are well-known problems in suicide attempters. A randomised controlled study was performed to investigate the influence of repeated telephone contacts on treatment attendance, repetition of suicidal behaviour and mental health the year after a suicide attempt. Subjects and methods: One month after their suicide attempt 216 patients were randomised to either two telephone interventions in addition to treatment as usual, or no such intervention during the subsequent year. The interventions included motivational support to attend and/or to stay in treatment. At 1 month and again after 12 months the following measurements were used: GSI (SCL-90), GAF and SSI. Results: At follow-up treatment attendance was high and did not differ between the randomised groups. Among those with an initial treatment contact other than psychiatric, more patients in the intervention group had such contact at follow-up. The randomised groups did not differ in repetition of suicide attempts during follow-up or in improvement in GSI (SCL-90), GAF and SSI. In individuals with no initial treatment the intervention group improved more in certain psychological symptom dimensions (SCL-90). Conclusions: Telephone interventions seem to have an effect on patients who at their suicide attempt had other treatment than psychiatric and in those with no treatment.
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?
Cedereke et al. (2002) found at 12-month follow-up significant improvements in global functioning in the group that received two telephone interviews at 4 and 8 months compared to no calls (n=107, p<0.001).
“At the 12-month follow-up interview, there were signi fi cant improvements in global functioning in the group that received two telephone interviews (aimed at increasing motivation for professional treatment) at 4 and 8 months, compared to no calls ( n =107, p <0.001).”
From Does asking about suicide and related behaviours induce suicidal ideation? What is the evidence? (2014) · cites this paper as Cedereke et al. (2002)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 123
- Authors
- Cedereke, M., Monti, K., & Öjehagen, A.
- Affiliations
- Skåne University Hospital (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Cedereke, M.
- Venue
- European Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 82-91
- ISSN
- 0924-9338 (ISSN-L)
- 1778-3585
- OpenAlex
- W2045024219
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 3.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Keywords
- suicide attempts, telephone-delivered intervention, treatment attendance, motivational support, follow-up care, psychological symptoms, psychiatric treatment
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Crisis Intervention, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Suicide, Attempted, Sweden, Telephone, Time Factors, 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