Cited by 71Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesDigital Mental Health InterventionsPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

The safety and acceptability of delivering an online intervention to secondary students at risk of suicide: findings from a pilot study

Open access
Robinson, Jo, Hetrick, Sarah, Cox, Georgina, Bendall, Sarah, Yung, Alison, Pirkis, Jane·2015·Early Intervention in Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Suicide‐related behaviour is a major problem among adolescents. Yet relatively few studies have tested the efficacy, acceptability and safety of interventions for this population. We developed and pilot tested an online intervention for at‐risk school students, which has led to reduced suicidal ideation, hopelessness and depressive symptoms. The aims of this study were to examine the safety and acceptability of the programme, and to determine which components were found to be most helpful and enjoyable. Methods: This pilot study employed a pre‐test/post‐test design, with an 8‐week intervention phase. Participants were assessed immediately before, and immediately after the intervention. Participants were also asked to complete a weekly questionnaire immediately after the intervention, and again 2 days later assessing suicidal ideation and distress. Results: Twenty‐one young people completed the intervention. Overall, the intervention did not lead to increases in suicidal ideation or distress. Participants reported enjoying the programme, in particular watching the video diaries and completing the activities, and said they would recommend the programme to a friend. Overall, the cognitive components of the programme were found to be most helpful. Conclusions: Overall, the programme appeared to be a safe and acceptable intervention for at‐risk adolescents. This was a small, pilot study so we need to interpret the results with caution. However, the findings are promising and suggest that young people at risk of suicide can safely be included in trials as long as adequate safety procedures are in place. The programme is now being tested in a randomized controlled trial.

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 · 10.1111/eip.12136

Cites

36 of 36 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?

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: 3

  1. [32]32. Lipczynska S. Suicide. Journal of Mental Health. 2009;18(2):188-91.
  2. [37]37. March J, Silva S, Petrycki S, Curry J, Wells K, Fairbank J, et al. Fluoxetine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and their combination for adolescents with depression -Treatment for adolescents with depression study (TADS): randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004;292(7):807-20.
  3. [42]42. Robinson, J., Hetrick, S., Cox, G., Bendall, S., Yung, A. & Pirkis, J. (2015). The safety and acceptability of delivering an online intervention to secondary students at risk of suicide: findings from a pilot study. EARLY INTERVENTION IN PSYCHIATRY, 9 (6), pp.498-506. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12136. Persistent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/59214 File Description: Accepted version

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robinson, J., Hetrick, S., Cox, G., Bendall, S., Yung, A., & Pirkis, J.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Robinson, Jo
Venue
Early Intervention in Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-03-31
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
498-506
ISSN
  • 1751-7885 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-7893
OpenAlex
W2105116898
Cited by
71
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3
FWCI
6.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Early Intervention in Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
  • NHMRC
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
suicide prevention, adolescents, online intervention, suicidal ideation, intervention safety, acceptability, video diaries, depressive symptoms, hopelessness, high school students
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Adolescent, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Pilot Projects, Schools, Students, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Internet, 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