Cited by 29Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesMental Health Research TopicsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Brief Assessment of Psychological Pain to Predict Suicidal Events at One Year in Depressed Patients

Alacreu-Crespo, Adrián, Cazals, Aurélie, Courtet, Philippe, Olié, Emilie·2020·Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics

Abstract

Dear Editor,Self-reported psychological pain could be a transdiagnostic tool in psychiatry and is closely connected to suicide [1]. Shneidman [2] defined it as “psychache,” an acute state of intense psychological pain associated with feelings of guilt, anguish, fear, panic, loneliness, and helplessness, which is at the core of the suicidal process. Previous research in 2 cohorts of students at high risk of suicide showed baseline psychological pain and variations in psychological pain to be stronger predictors of suicidal ideation (SI) than depression or hopelessness during follow-up [3, 4]. However, a prospective study in 153 psychiatric inpatients showed that baseline psychological pain did not predict a future suicide attempt (SA) [5].Physical pain has also been implicated in acute suicidal behavior [6] and is related to psychological pain [1]. Olié et al. [7] developed the Psychological and Physical Pain Visual Analog Scale (PPP-VAS) to rapidly evaluate 6 dimensions of pain: current, mean and worst (during the last 15 days) psychological pain and physical pain. This scale was recently validated in patients with depression and in patients at risk of suicide [8].Our aim was to determine whether baseline psychological and physical pain, assessed with the PPP-VAS, may predict suicidal events (i.e., suicide death, SA, and hospitalization for SI) at 1 year of follow-up in depressed patients. We hypothesized that psychological but not physical pain would predict future suicidal…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000506957

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Patients with high psychological pain at inclusion have more possibilities to have a suicidal event (suicide, suicide attempt, or hospitalisation for suicide) 1 year later.

    “patients with high psychological pain at inclusion have more possibilities to have a suicidal event (suicide, suicide attempt, or hospitalisation for suicide) 1 year later [15].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alacreu-Crespo, A., Cazals, A., Courtet, P., & Olié, E.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Venue
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2020
Volume
89
Issue
5
Pages
320-323
ISSN
  • 0033-3190 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0348
OpenAlex
W3015100294
Cited by
29
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
psychological suffering, emotional pain, suicide risk prediction, depression, suicide attempts, suicidal ideation, bodily pain, mood disorders, childhood trauma, psychiatric inpatients, suicide mortality, transdiagnostic assessment, visual analogue scale
MeSH terms
Adult, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Pain, Pain Measurement, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Logistic Models, 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