The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized trial of a gatekeeper program for suicide prevention: 1-year impact on secondary school staff.
Open accessAbstract
Gatekeeper-training programs, designed to increase identification and referral of suicidal individuals, are widespread but largely untested. A group-based randomized trial with 32 schools examined impact of Question, Persuade, Refer (QPR) training on a stratified random sample of 249 staff with 1-year average follow-up. To test QPR impact, the authors introduced and contrasted 2 models of gatekeeper-training effects in a population: gatekeeper surveillance and gatekeeper communication. Intent-to-treat analyses showed that training increased self-reported knowledge (effect size [ES] = 0.41), appraisals of efficacy (ES = 1.22), and service access (ES = 1.07). Training effects varied dramatically. Appraisals increased most for staff with lowest baseline appraisals, and suicide identification behaviors increased most for staff already communicating with students about suicide and distress. Consistent with the communication model, increased knowledge and appraisals were not sufficient to increase suicide identification behaviors. Also consistent with the communication model were results from 2,059 8th and 10th graders surveyed showing that fewer students with prior suicide attempts endorsed talking to adults about distress. Skill training for staff serving as "natural gatekeepers" plus interventions that modify students' help-seeking behaviors are recommended to supplement universal gatekeeper training.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Williams, J. B. W., & First, M. (2013) · Encyclopedia of Social Work · doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.104 · Cited by 109,519
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS
(2001) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2001.s574 · Cited by 9,278
Brown, R. A., Hastie, T. J., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1991) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532174 · Cited by 8,176
The Handbook of Research Synthesis.
Howel, D., Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1995) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533295 · Cited by 3,642
Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2014) · Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online · doi:10.1002/9781118445112.stat03141 · Cited by 3,156
Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance United States, 2015
Kann, L., McManus, T., Harris, W. A., Shanklin, S. L., Flint, K. H., Hawkins, J., Queen, B., Lowry, R., Olsen, E. O., Chyen, D., et al. (2016) · MMWR. Surveillance Summaries · doi:10.15585/mmwr.ss6506a1 · Cited by 2,036
Parametric measures of effect size.
Rosenthal, R. (1994) · Cited by 1,847
Generalized additive models for medical research
Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (1995) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029500400302 · Cited by 1,266
Design Sensitivity: Statistical Power for Experimental Research.
Eliason, S. R., & Lipsey, M. W. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2072167 · Cited by 1,040
Cited by
(2009) · Cited by 2,013
Suicide prevention strategies revisited: 10-year systematic review
Zalsman, G., Hawton, K., Wasserman, D., van Heeringen, K., Arensman, E., Sarchiapone, M., Carli, V., Höschl, C., Barzilay, R., Balazs, J., et al. (2016) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30030-x · Cited by 1,765
Beidas, R. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2010) · Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01187.x · Cited by 1,085
Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder.
Stoffers-Winterling, J. M., Völlm, B. A., Rücker, G., Timmer, A., Huband, N., & Lieb, K. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005652.pub2 · Cited by 895
Annual Research Review: Suicide among youth – epidemiology, (potential) etiology, and treatment
Cha, C. B., Franz, P. J., M. Guzmán, E., Glenn, C. R., Kleiman, E. M., & Nock, M. K. (2018) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12831 · Cited by 602
Metadata
- Authors
- Wyman, P. A., Brown, C. H., Inman, J., Cross, W., Schmeelk-Cone, K., Guo, J., & Pena, J. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 104-115
- ISSN
- 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2117
- OpenAlex
- W2037015921
- Cited by
- 527
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 19.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R34MH071189; P20MH071897; R01MH40859)
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (5 UD1 SM57405)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized trial of a gatekeeper program for suicide prevention: 1-year impact on secondary school staff. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0022-006x.76.1.104
- The paper
- Wyman, P. A., Brown, C. H., Inman, J., Cross, W., Schmeelk-Cone, K., Guo, J., & Pena, J. B. (2008). Randomized trial of a gatekeeper program for suicide prevention: 1-year impact on secondary school staff. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006x.76.1.104
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
