Cited by 20Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

A pilot randomized control trial of a dyadic safety planning intervention: Safe actions for families to encourage recovery

Open access
Goodman, Marianne, Sullivan, Sarah R., Spears, Angela Page, Crasta, Dev, Mitchell, Emily L., Stanley, Barbara, Dixon, Lisa, Hazlett, Erin A. +1 more·2022·Couple and Family Psychology Research and Practice

Abstract

A recent systematic review on family and suicide prevention efforts identified a lack of family-based safety planning interventions for adults. To address this gap, The Safe Actions for Families to Encourage Recovery (SAFER) intervention was created. SAFER is a novel, manualized, 4- session, family-based treatment intervention that provides the tools and structure to support family involvement in Safety Planning Intervention (SPI) for Veterans at moderate risk for suicide. The SAFER intervention includes the use of psychoeducation, communication skills training, and development of a Veteran, and a complementary supporting partner, SPI. This Stage II (2aii) randomized clinical trial (RCT) evaluated the preliminary efficacy of this innovative and much-needed approach. Thirty-nine Veterans and an associated supporting partner were randomized to receive either SAFER or currently mandated (i.e., standard) individual Safety Planning Intervention (I-SPI). Veterans in the SAFER condition as compared to I-SPI exhibited significant monthly decrements in suicide ideation as measured by the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (B=-0.37; p=.032). Moreover, a treatment-by-time interaction emerged when predicting improvements in Veteran suicide-related coping (B=0.08; p=.028) and supporting partner support of Veteran's coping efforts (B=0.17; p=.032). However, the treatment effect for Veteran coping was not significant in dyadic analyses (B=0.07; p=.151) after controlling for the partner's support (B=0.16; p=.009). Self-reported appraisals of relational factors and self-efficacy were not impacted by condition for either Veterans or supporting partners. This initial efficacy pilot trial suggests that a brief dyad-based SPI has the potential to improve Veteran suicide symptoms and help family members support the Veteran's coping efforts. However more intensive family work may be required for changes in self-perceptions of burdensomeness, belongingness, and caregiver perceptions of the Veteran as a burden. Nonetheless, SAFER's discussion and disclosure about suicide symptoms facilitated more robust development of SPI for the Veteran and their accompanying supporting partner.

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/cfp0000206

Cites

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?

  • This reflects a pattern of challenges with patient comfort/willingness to involve a support person in the larger suicide prevention literature.

    “Finally, only half of the participants included a support person; this reflects a pattern of challenges with patient comfort/willingness to involve a support person in the larger suicide prevention literature.”

    From An Open-Phase Pilot Trial of an Integration of Prolonged Exposure Therapy and the Coping Long-Term With Active Suicide Program (2026) · cites this paper as Goodman et al., 2022

    The Discussion’s Limitations section reports that hesitancy to involve family members was a leading reason Veterans declined this study. The Discussion also describes broader evidence of reluctance to disclose suicidal thoughts, but does not establish a pattern across the larger suicide prevention literature of patients being unwilling to involve a support person. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In one study in the VA, over 350 veterans were approached to participate, and 39 were randomized, with the majority deciding not to participate because of hesitancy in involving family members.

    “For instance, in one study in the VA, over 350 veterans were approached to participate, and 39 were randomized, with the majority deciding not to participate because of hesitancy in involving family members (Goodman et al., 2022).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 66 · Cited by 20

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Frey LM, & Cerel J. (2015). Risk for suicide and the role of family: A narrative review. Journal of family issues, 36(6), 716– 736. 10.1177/0192513X13515885 · DOI
  2. Hutchinson J, & Banks-Williams L. (2006). Clinical issues and treatment considerations for new Veterans: Soldiers of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Primary psychiatry, 13(3), 66– 71. Retrieved from http://primarypsychiatry.com/wpcontent/uploads/import/0306PP_Hutchinson.pdf
  3. Kenny DA, Kashy DA, & Cook WL (2020). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford press.
  4. Klonsky ED, & May AM (2015). The three-step theory (3ST): A new theory of suicide rooted in the “ideation-to-action” framework. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 8(2), 114– 129.
  5. Makin-Byrd K, Gifford E, McCutcheon S, & Glynn S. (2011). Family and couples treatment for newly returning Veterans. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42(1), 47.
  6. Marin L, Sullivan S, Spears AP, & Goodman M. (2019). “ Project Life Force-Geriatric”: A novel suicide safety planning group treatment. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 27(3), S213– S214.
  7. Raudenbush SW, & Bryk AS (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Sage.
  8. Rutherford G, & Allegria M. (2010). Returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan: Preliminary assessment of readjustment needs of Veterans, service members, and their families. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, 1(1), 1– 192. 10.17226/12812 25032369 · DOI
  9. Sayers SL, Glynn SM, & McCutcheon S. (2014). Family court and a review of family services in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Family Court Review, 52(3), 371– 380.
  10. Singh NN, Curtis WJ, Ellis CR, Nicholson MW, Villani TM, & Wechsler HA (1995). Psychometric analysis of the family empowerment scale. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 3(2), 85– 91.
  11. Sullivan S, Spears AP, Mitchell E, Walsh S, Love C, & Goodman M. (2021). Family treatments for individuals at risk for suicide: A PRISMA scoping review. Crisis. Accepted for publication on 07/11/2021.
  12. Thomas G. (2020). The stress effects of military families’ transition to civilian life. Mental health practice, 23(3). 10.7748/mhp.2018.e1311 · DOI

Authors
Goodman, M., Sullivan, S. R., Spears, A. P., Crasta, D., Mitchell, E. L., Stanley, B., Dixon, L., Hazlett, E. A., & Glynn, S.
Affiliations
  • James J. Peters VA Medical Center (US)
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
Couple and Family Psychology Research and Practice
Published
2022-03
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
42-59
ISSN
  • 2160-4096 (ISSN-L)
  • 2160-410X
OpenAlex
W4200102551
Cited by
20
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Couple and Family Psychology Research and Practice (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • US Department of Veterans Affairs (1 I 01 RX002432-0)
  • VISN-2 MIRECC
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
Safety Planning Intervention, suicide prevention, veterans, family intervention, dyadic intervention, suicidal ideation, partner support, suicide risk, communication skills training, psychoeducation

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