Cited by 112Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesPsychiatric care and mental health servicesHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse

Can we usefully stratify patients according to suicide risk?

Open access
Large, Matthew Michael, Ryan, Christopher James, Carter, Gregory, Kapur, Nav·2017·BMJ

Abstract

In the UK, one in five adults has considered suicide at some time, and one in 15 has attempted suicide. Half of those who attempt suicide seek help afterwards—a quarter from a GP, a quarter from a hospital or specialist medical or psychiatric service. Suicidal patients; patients who present to health services with suicidal ideas, self harm, or suicide attempts; and patients who present as significantly distressed or mentally ill can be challenging to manage. Doctors are often advised to use suicide risk assessment to help them decide management plans. A wide variety of risk factors have been implicated in the stratification of potentially suicidal patients. This stratification is often expressed in terms of high, medium, or low-risk. In practice, doctors commonly give the greatest importance to suicidal ideation. In some specialist mental health settings these judgments are aided by local risk assessment forms composed of lists of clinical and demographic factors, while other centres use risk strata derived from validated questionnaires or scales. However, there is little consensus over their use and virtually no evidence that any of the method of suicide risk stratification can contribute to suicide prevention.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.j4627

Cites

5 of 5 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: 16

  1. Betz ME, Boudreaux ED. Managing suicidal patients in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2016;359:276-82. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.09.001 pmid:26443554. · DOI
  2. Sinclair L, Leach R. Exploring thoughts of suicide. BMJ 2017;359:j1128. doi:10.1136/bmj. j1128 pmid:28360192. · DOI
  3. Tanguturi Y, Bodic M, Taub A, Homel P, Jacob T. Suicide risk assessment by residents: deficiencies of documentation. Acad Psychiatry 2017;359:513-9. doi:10.1007/s40596- 016-0644-6 pmid:28083763. · DOI
  4. Morgan HG, Stanton R. Suicide among psychiatric in-patients in a changing clinical scene. Suicidal ideation as a paramount index of short-term risk. Br J Psychiatry 1997;359:561-3. doi:10.1192/bjp.171.6.561 pmid:9519097. · DOI
  5. Quinlivan L, Cooper J, Steeg S, et al. Scales for predicting risk following self-harm: an observational study in 32 hospitals in England. BMJ Open 2014;359:e004732. doi:10. 1136/bmjopen-2013-004732 pmid:24793255. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Wand T. Investigating the evidence for the effectiveness of risk assessment in mental health care. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2012;359:2-7. doi:10.3109/01612840.2011. 616984 pmid:22224960. · DOI
  7. Szmukler G, Everitt B, Leese M. Risk assessment and receiver operating characteristic curves. Psychol Med 2012;359:895-8. doi:10.1017/S003329171100208X pmid:22017918. · DOI
  8. Chapman CL, Mullin K, Ryan CJ, Kuffel A, Nielssen O, Large MM. Meta-analysis of the association between suicidal ideation and later suicide among patients with either a schizophrenia spectrum psychosis or a mood disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2015;359:162-73. doi:10.1111/acps.12359 pmid:25358861. · DOI
  9. Ribeiro JD, Franklin JC, Fox KR, et al. Self-injurious thoughts and behaviors as risk factors for future suicide ideation, attempts, and death: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychol Med 2016;359:225-36. doi:10.1017/S0033291715001804 pmid:26370729. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Chan MK, Bhatti H, Meader N, et al. Predicting suicide following self-harm: systematic review of risk factors and risk scales. Br J Psychiatry 2016;359:277-83. doi:10.1192/bjp. bp.115.170050 pmid:27340111. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Hubers AA, Moaddine S, Peersmann SH, et al. Suicidal ideation and subsequent completed suicide in both psychiatric and non-psychiatric populations: a meta-analysis. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 2016:1-13. doi:10.1017/S2045796016001049 pmid:27989254. · DOI
  12. Carter G, Milner A, McGill K, Pirkis J, Kapur N, Spittal MJ. Predicting suicidal behaviours using clinical instruments: systematic review and meta-analysis of positive predictive values for risk scales. Br J Psychiatry 2017;359:387-95. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.116. 182717 pmid:28302700. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;359:1006-12. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005 pmid:19631508. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Bostwick JM, Pankratz VS. Affective disorders and suicide risk: a reexamination. Am J Psychiatry 2000;359:1925-32. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.157.12.1925 pmid:11097952. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Bolton JM, Gunnell D, Turecki G. Suicide risk assessment and intervention in people with mental illness. BMJ 2015;359:h4978. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4978 pmid:26552947. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/ permissions For personal use only: See rights and reprints http://www.bmj.com/permissions Subscribe: http://www.bmj.com/subscribe

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Large, M. M., Ryan, C. J., Carter, G., & Kapur, N.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Large, Matthew Michael
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2017-10-17
Volume
359
Pages
j4627
ISSN
  • 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
OpenAlex
W2763440556
Cited by
112
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 1
FWCI
16.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Keywords
suicide risk assessment, suicide risk stratification, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, self-harm, suicide prevention, risk assessment questionnaire, mental health services, primary care
MeSH terms
Suicide Prevention, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychological Tests, Risk Factors, Suicide, Self-Injurious Behavior, Risk Assessment, 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