Cited by 54Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesDigital Mental Health InterventionsPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Adaptive intervention for prevention of adolescent suicidal behavior after hospitalization: a pilot sequential multiple assignment randomized trial

Open access
Czyz, Ewa K., King, Cheryl A., Prouty, David, Micol, Valerie J., Walton, Maureen, Nahum‐Shani, Inbal·2021·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: The need for effective interventions for psychiatrically hospitalized adolescents who have varying levels of postdischarge suicide risk calls for personalized approaches, such as adaptive interventions (AIs). We conducted a nonrestricted pilot Sequential, Multiple Assignment, Randomized Trial (SMART) to guide the development of an AI targeting suicide risk after hospitalization. Methods: Adolescent inpatients ( N = 80; ages 13–17; 67.5% female) were randomized in Phase 1 to a Motivational Interview‐Enhanced Safety Plan (MI‐SP), delivered during hospitalization, alone or in combination with postdischarge text‐based support (Texts). Two weeks after discharge, participants were re‐randomized in Phase 2 to added telephone booster calls or to no calls. Mechanisms of change were assessed with daily diaries for four weeks and over a 1‐ and 3‐month follow‐up. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT03838198). Results: Procedures were feasible and acceptable. Mixed effects models indicate that adolescents randomized to MI‐SP + Texts (Phase 1) and those randomized to booster calls (Phase 2) experienced significant improvement in daily‐level mechanisms, including safety plan use, self‐efficacy to refrain from suicidal action, and coping by support seeking. Those randomized to MI‐SP + Texts also reported significantly higher coping self‐efficacy at 1 and 3 months. Although exploratory, results were in the expected direction for MI‐SP + Texts, versus MI‐SP alone, in terms of lower risk of suicide attempts (Hazard ratio = 0.30; 95% CI = 0.06, 1.48) and suicidal behavior (Hazard ratio = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.10, 1.37) three months after discharge. Moreover, augmentation with booster calls did not have an overall meaningful impact on suicide attempts (Hazard ratio = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.17, 3.05) or suicidal behavior (Hazard ratio = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.23, 2.67); however, boosters benefited most those initially assigned to MI‐SP + Texts. Conclusions: The current SMART was feasible and acceptable for the purpose of informing an AI for suicidal adolescents, warranting additional study. Findings also indicate that postdischarge text‐based support offers a promising augmentation to safety planning delivered during hospitalization.

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/jcpp.13383

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • Results for all outcomes were consistent with those of the full sample after removal of non-RCT-designed studies and on inclusion of studies that involved any SPI component in the control condition.

    “Results for all outcomes were consistent with those of the full sample after removal of non–RCT-designed studies and on inclusion of studies that involved any SPI component in the control condition39,42 (eFigure in Supplement 1).”

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. Collins LM & Kugler K (Eds.) (2018). Optimization of behavioral, biobehavioral, and biomedical interventions. Springer.
  2. King CA, Ewell Foster C, & Rogalski KM (2013). Teen suicide risk: A practitioner guide to screening, assessment, and management. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  3. Miller WR, & Rollnick S (2013). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Czyz, E. K., King, C. A., Prouty, D., Micol, V. J., Walton, M., & Nahum‐Shani, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Institute for Social Research University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI USA
Corresponding author
Czyz, Ewa K.
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-15
Volume
62
Issue
8
Pages
1019-1031
ISSN
  • 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7610
OpenAlex
W3129292092
Cited by
54
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6
FWCI
4.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (K23‐MH‐113776‐01)
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
adaptive interventions, adolescent suicide prevention, suicidal behavior, psychiatric hospitalization, motivational interviewing, safety planning, coping self-efficacy, suicide attempts, personalized interventions, mechanisms of change, support seeking, sequential multiple assignment randomized trial, daily diary
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Aftercare, Female, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Patient Discharge, Suicide, Attempted, 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