CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 147Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesDigital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and Access

Online suicide risk screening and intervention with college students: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

Open access
King, Cheryl A., Eisenberg, Daniel, Zheng, Kai, Czyz, Ewa, Kramer, Anne, Horwitz, Adam, Chermack, Stephen·2015·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0038805PMC PMC4446155
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This pilot randomized controlled trial examined the effect of an online intervention for college students at risk for suicide, Electronic Bridge to Mental Health Services (eBridge), which included personalized feedback and optional online counseling delivered in accordance with motivational interviewing principles. Primary outcomes were readiness to seek information or talk with family and friends about mental health treatment, readiness to seek mental health treatment, and actual treatment linkage. METHOD: Participants were 76 college students (45 women, 31 men; mean age = 22.9 years, SD = 5.0 years) at a large public university who screened positive for suicide risk, defined by at least 2 of the following: suicidal thoughts, history of suicide attempt, depression, and alcohol abuse. Racial/ethnic self-identifications were primarily Caucasian (n = 54) and Asian (n = 21). Students were randomized to eBridge or the control condition (personalized feedback only, offered in plain report format). Outcomes were measured at 2-month follow-up. RESULTS: Despite relatively modest engagement in online counseling (29% of students posted ≥1 message), students assigned to eBridge reported significantly higher readiness for help-seeking scores, especially readiness to talk to family, talk to friends, and see a mental health professional. Students assigned to eBridge also reported lower stigma levels and were more likely to link to mental health treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that offering students personalized feedback and the option of online counseling, using motivational interviewing principles, has a positive impact on students' readiness to consider and engage in mental health treatment. Further research is warranted to determine the robustness of this effect, the mechanism by which improved readiness and treatment linkage occurs, and the longer term impact on student mental health outcomes.

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 · 10.1037/a0038805

Cites

21 of 21 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?

  • Other experimental evaluations of personalized risk feedback to increase treatment for mental health problems have yielded weak results.

    “However, other experimental evaluations of the effects of personalized risk feedback to increase treatment for mental health problems have yielded weak results (Chan et al., 2016; King et al., 2015; Quinlivan et al., 2014; Quinlivan et al., 2016), although one study reported an effect on utilization in some subgroups (Batterham, Calear, Sunderland, Carragher, & Brewer, 2016).”

    From Increasing intentions to use mental health services among university students. Results of a pilot randomized controlled trial within the World Health Organization's World Mental Health International College Student Initiative (2019) · cites this paper as King et al., 2015

    The Results report significantly higher readiness to seek help in the eBridge group and say those students were more likely to have received mental health treatment; the Discussion calls the findings promising, though preliminary. The Methods also state that both groups received personalized feedback, so the trial did not isolate the effect of feedback alone. This paper does not characterize its treatment-linkage results as weak. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In several studies with high attrition, attrition rates were equal between groups, suggesting that drop out rates related more to recruitment methods than to non-engagement.

    “In several of these studies, while attrition rates were high, they were equal between groups (for e.g. 50) suggesting that drop out rates related more to recruitment methods than to non-engagement.”

    From What Works and What Doesn’t Work? A Systematic Review of Digital Mental Health Interventions for Depression and Anxiety in Young People (2019) · cites this paper as [50]

    Method > Procedures (page unavailable) reports two-month retention of 76% in eBridge and 83% in the control group, with no significant difference between groups. The Discussion (page unavailable) notes low initial survey participation and suggests institutional promotion might improve it, but does not conclude that follow-up dropout was due more to recruitment methods than to non-engagement. This single trial also cannot establish the claim about several studies. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Only two interventions explicitly mentioned utilizing a health behavior model.

    “Interestingly, only two interventions explicitly mentioned utilizing a health behavior model.28,38”

    From Technology-Based Interventions to Improve Help-Seeking for Mental Health Concerns: A Systematic Review (2022) · cites this paper as [38]

  • King et al. used the motivational interviewing approach.

    “King et al. 38 used the motivational interviewing approach”

    From Technology-Based Interventions to Improve Help-Seeking for Mental Health Concerns: A Systematic Review (2022) · cites this paper as [38]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
King, C. A., Eisenberg, D., Zheng, K., Czyz, E., Kramer, A., Horwitz, A., & Chermack, S.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2015-06
Volume
83
Issue
3
Pages
630-636
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
DOI
10.1037/a0038805
PMC
PMC4446155
OpenAlex
W2109685175
Cited by
147
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
15.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R34 MH083032; K24 MH077705)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
suicide risk screening, university students, online intervention, personalized feedback, motivational interviewing, mental health stigma, suicide prevention, online counseling
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Alcoholism, Counseling, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Mental Health Services, Pilot Projects, Students, Suicide, Suicide, Attempted, Universities, Risk Assessment, Internet, 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