Cited by 38Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesPsychiatric care and mental health servicesHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints

Clinical assessment and treatment of suicidal risk: A critique of contemporary care and CAMS as a possible remedy

Jobes, David A.·2017·Practice Innovations

Abstract

There is a significant need to improve clinical practices related to suicidal patients within contemporary mental health practice. It is argued that there is a general over-reliance on psychotropic medications and the use of inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations for suicidal risk. This reliance is

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pri0000054

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jobes, D. A.
Corresponding author
Jobes, David A.
Venue
Practice Innovations
Published
2017-12
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
207-220
ISSN
  • 2377-889X (ISSN-L)
  • 2377-8903
OpenAlex
W2776900568
Cited by
38
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2
FWCI
4.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Practice Innovations (publishedVersion)
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 › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Keywords
suicide risk, suicide prevention, CAMS, psychotropic drugs, psychiatric hospitalization, mental health services

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