CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,025Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesTreatment of Major DepressionBipolar Disorder and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA): Classification of Suicidal Events in the FDA’s Pediatric Suicidal Risk Analysis of Antidepressants

Open access
Posner, Kelly, Oquendo, Maria A., Gould, Madelyn, Stanley, Barbara, Davies, Mark·2007·American Journal of Psychiatry
DOI 10.1176/ajp.2007.164.7.1035PMC PMC3804920
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the link between antidepressants and suicidal behavior and ideation (suicidality) in youth, adverse events from pediatric clinical trials were classified in order to identify suicidal events. The authors describe the Columbia Classification Algorithm for Suicide Assessment (C-CASA), a standardized suicidal rating system that provided data for the pediatric suicidal risk analysis of antidepressants conducted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Method: Adverse events (N=427) from 25 pediatric antidepressant clinical trials were systematically identified by pharmaceutical companies. Randomly assigned adverse events were evaluated by three of nine independent expert suicidologists using the Columbia classification algorithm. Reliability of the C-CASA ratings and agreement with pharmaceutical company classification were estimated. Results: Twenty-six new, possibly suicidal events (behavior and ideation) that were not originally identified by pharmaceutical companies were identified in the C-CASA, and 12 events originally labeled as suicidal by pharmaceutical companies were eliminated, which resulted in a total of 38 discrepant ratings. For the specific label of “suicide attempt,” a relatively low level of agreement was observed between the C-CASA and pharmaceutical company ratings, with the C-CASA reporting a 50% reduction in ratings. Thus, although the C-CASA resulted in the identification of more suicidal events overall, fewer events were classified as suicide attempts. Additionally, the C-CASA ratings were highly reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]=0.89). Conclusions: Utilizing a methodical, anchored approach to categorizing suicidality provides an accurate and comprehensive identification of suicidal events. The FDA’s audit of the C-CASA demonstrated excellent transportability of this approach. The Columbia algorithm was used to classify suicidal adverse events in the recent FDA adult antidepressant safety analyses and has also been mandated to be applied to all anticonvulsant trials and other centrally acting agents and nonpsychotropic drugs.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/ajp.2007.164.7.1035

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Health America, Plymouth Meeting. Plymouth, Pa, Information Marketing Systems
  2. Rosack J, 2005, Psychiatr News, 40, 1
  3. Gibbons RD, 2006, Hollywood, Fla
  4. Bille-Brahe U, 2004, Suicidal Behaviour in Europe, 11
  5. 10.1037/0022-006X.62.2.297 · DOI
  6. Brown GK, 2005, J Consult Clin Psychol, 162, 1977
  7. Iyasu S, 2004, FDA Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee and the Pediatric Advisory Committee Meeting, Bethesda, Md, FDA, 2004
  8. Mosholder A, 2006, Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee and the Pediatric Advisory Committee Meeting. Bethesda, Md, FDA, 2004
  9. Laughren TP, 2006, Overview for Meeting of Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Posner, K., Oquendo, M. A., Gould, M., Stanley, B., & Davies, M.
Affiliations
New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Posner, Kelly
ORCID
Davies, Mark
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Publisher
American Psychiatric Association Publishing
Published
2007-07
Volume
164
Issue
7
Pages
1035-1043
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
DOI
10.1176/ajp.2007.164.7.1035
PMC
PMC3804920
OpenAlex
W2138959943
Cited by
1,025
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 69 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 58
FWCI
45.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (P20AA015630)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH090964)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, suicide attempts, antidepressants, pediatric clinical trials, adverse event classification, rating reliability, youth suicidality
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Age Factors, Algorithms, Antidepressive Agents, Mental Disorders, Child, Depressive Disorder, Drug Industry, Female, Humans, Legislation, Drug, Male, Terminology as Topic, Placebos, Suicide, Suicide, Attempted, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Reproducibility of Results, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, 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