CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 181Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesInjury Epidemiology and PreventionGun Ownership and Violence Research

Suicide screening in schools, primary care and emergency departments

Open access
Horowitz, Lisa M, Ballard, Elizabeth D, Pao, Maryland·2009·Current Opinion in Pediatrics
DOI 10.1097/mop.0b013e3283307a89PMC PMC2879582
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Every year, suicide claims the lives of tens of thousands of young people worldwide. Despite its high prevalence and known risk factors, suicidality is often undetected. Early identification of suicide risk may be an important method of mitigating this public health crisis. Screening youth for suicide may be a critical step in suicide prevention. This paper reviews suicide screening in three different settings: schools, primary care clinics and emergency departments (EDs). RECENT FINDINGS: Unrecognized and thus untreated suicidality leads to substantial morbidity and mortality. With the onus of detection falling on nonmental health professionals, brief screening tools can be used to initiate more in-depth evaluations. Nonetheless, there are serious complexities and implications of screening all children and adolescents for suicide. Recent studies show that managing positive screens is a monumental challenge, including the problem of false positives and the burden subsequently posed on systems of care. Furthermore, nearly 60% of youth in need of mental health services do not receive the care they need, even after suicide attempt. Schools, primary care clinics and EDs are logical settings where screening that leads to intervention can be initiated. SUMMARY: Valid, brief and easy-to-administer screening tools can be utilized to detect risk of suicide in children and adolescents. Targeted suicide screening in schools, and universal suicide screening in primary care clinics and EDs may be the most effective way to recognize and prevent self-harm. These settings must be equipped to manage youth who screen positive with effective and timely interventions. Most importantly, the impact of suicide screening in various settings needs to be further assessed.

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 · 10.1097/mop.0b013e3283307a89

Cites

82 of 82 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

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [11]Institute of Medicine. Preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people: progress and possibilities Washington, DC National Academy Press 2009 20662125

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Horowitz, L. M., Ballard, E. D., & Pao, M.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Horowitz, Lisa M
ORCID
Venue
Current Opinion in Pediatrics
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2009-10
Volume
21
Issue
5
Pages
620-627
ISSN
1040-8703 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/mop.0b013e3283307a89
PMC
PMC2879582
OpenAlex
W2003711439
Semantic Scholar
cca7f0dc629e5304172947e7fa9f2bc75e8ba3b2
Cited by
181
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 13
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • National Institute of Mental Health (ZIAMH002922)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
  • Social Sciences › Health › Gun Ownership and Violence Research
Keywords
suicide risk screening, youth suicide, suicide prevention, school-based screening, primary care, emergency department, suicide risk assessment, screening tool, false positives, access to mental health care, adolescents, children
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Adolescent, Child, Depressive Disorder, Emergency Service, Hospital, Humans, Mass Screening, Primary Health Care, School Health Services, Suicide, Risk Assessment

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