Cited by 106Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPsychiatric care and mental health services

Motivational interviewing-enhanced safety planning for adolescents at high suicide risk: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Czyz, E. K., King, C. A., Biermann, B. J.·2019·Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology

Abstract

This pilot randomized controlled trial examined the feasibility and acceptability of a motivational interview (MI)-enhanced safety planning intervention (MI-SafeCope) for teens hospitalized due to suicide risk and explored proximal outcomes (possible mechanisms of change). Participants were 36 hospitalized adolescents (ages 13-17; 78.8% female) with last-week suicidal ideation and/or past-month suicide attempts. Adolescents were randomized to MI-SafeCope, a three-component intervention (individual and family sessions, postdischarge call), or to treatment as usual. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. We also explored differences in proximal outcomes assessed at 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months (family connectedness, motivation for safety plan use, parental motivation to encourage safety plan use), as well as daily for 4 weeks (self-efficacy, coping behavior, safety plan use). Participation and retention rates and intervention satisfaction ratings indicate feasibility and acceptability. Mixed-effects models of daily assessments indicated, for the MI-SafeCope group, significantly higher self-efficacy to refrain from suicidal action (B = 1.15, p = .030), greater reliance on self to cope with suicidal ideation (B = 1.56, p = .042), and higher likelihood of safety plan use to manage suicidal thoughts (B = 0.25, p = .004). Parents in the MI-SafeCope group reported higher motivation to encourage safety plan use (B = 1.04, p = .031). Safety planning incorporating MI is feasible and acceptable with hospitalized teens. Preliminary findings suggest that MI strategies may be promising in maintaining adherence to safety plans, increasing self-efficacy and coping, and in fostering parents' motivation to encourage safety plan use. Our study also highlights the benefit of daily-level assessment of individuals' response to suicide-specific interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15374416.2018.1496442

Cites

71 of 71 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

1 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Czyz, E. K., King, C. A., & Biermann, B. J.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Czyz, E. K.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology
Published
2018-08-24
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
250-262
ISSN
  • 1537-4416 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-4424
OpenAlex
W2888450918
Cited by
105
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
10.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (PDF-0-028-14)
  • Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (Postdoctoral Translational Scholar Program)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
motivational interviewing, safety planning, adolescents, suicide risk, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, hospitalized adolescents, self-efficacy, coping styles, family involvement, parental motivation, intervention feasibility and acceptability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Female, Humans, Male, Pilot Projects, Suicide, Attempted, Motivational Interviewing

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