Cited by 63Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesPsychiatric care and mental health servicesPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Effect of crisis response planning on patient mood and clinician decision making: A clinical trial with suicidal U.S. soldiers

Open access
Bryan, Craig J., Mintz, Jim, Clemans, Tracy A., Burch, T. Scott, Leeson, Bruce, Williams, Sean, Rudd, M. David·2018·Psychiatric Services

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study examined the immediate effect of crisis interventions on the emotional state of acutely suicidal soldiers and clinician decision making. METHODS: Soldiers (N=97) presenting to a military emergency department or behavioral health clinic were randomly assigned to receive a contract for safety (N=32), standard crisis response plan (S-CRP; N=32), or enhanced crisis response plan (E-CRP; N=33). Soldiers completed self-report scales before and after the intervention. Clinicians blinded to treatment group assignment rated participants' suicide risk level and made a decision about inpatient psychiatric admission. RESULTS: Larger reductions in negative emotional states occurred in S-CRP and E-CRP. Larger increases in positive emotional states occurred in E-CRP. Clinician suicide risk ratings did not differ across treatment groups. Participants in E-CRP were less likely to be psychiatrically admitted. CONCLUSIONS: The CRP immediately reduces negative emotional states among acutely suicidal soldiers. Discussing a patient's reasons for living during a CRP also reduces the likelihood of inpatient psychiatric admission.

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 · 10.1176/appi.ps.201700157

Cites

7 of 7 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?

  • Our results are consistent with findings that crisis response planning reduced suicide attempts during a 6-month follow-up period in high-risk active duty soldiers.

    “Our results are consistent with findings that crisis response planning reduced suicide attempts during a 6-month follow-up period in high-risk active duty soldiers.42”

    From Comparison of the Safety Planning Intervention With Follow-up vs Usual Care of Suicidal Patients Treated in the Emergency Department (2018) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Methods section reports that the parent trial found a significant reduction in suicide attempt rates among acutely suicidal active-duty Army personnel who received crisis response planning. The paper does not specify a six-month follow-up period for that finding; this paper itself examines immediate effects. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Crisis response or safety planning is associated with rapid changes in suicidal thoughts within hours and decreased risk of suicide attempt within months.

    “Another new treatment approach is crisis response or safety planning, an outgrowth of cognitive behavioral therapy for suicide prevention that is associated with rapid changes in suicidal thoughts within hours (12) and decreased risk of suicide attempt within months (13, 14).”

    From New methods for assessing rapid changes in suicide risk (2021) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Ketamine is just one potential rapid intervention; other rapid-acting interventions are likely associated with different patterns of symptom improvement.

    “Finally, ketamine is just one potential rapid intervention for depression and suicidal thoughts; other rapid-acting interventions are likely associated with different patterns of symptom improvement (Bryan et al., 2018; Croarkin et al., 2018).”

    From Clinical indicators of the suicide crisis and response to ketamine (2025) · cites this paper as Bryan et al., 2018

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bryan, C. J., Mintz, J., Clemans, T. A., Burch, T. S., Leeson, B., Williams, S., & Rudd, M. D.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
Venue
Psychiatric Services
Published
2018-01-01
Volume
69
Issue
1
Pages
108-111
ISSN
  • 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
  • 1075-2730
  • 1557-9700
OpenAlex
W2763590286
Cited by
63
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7
FWCI
6.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Defense (W81XWH, W81XWH1020181)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
crisis response planning, suicide prevention, military personnel, clinician decision-making, suicide risk assessment, psychiatric hospital admissions, emotional state, reasons for living
MeSH terms
Clinical Decision-Making, Suicide Prevention, Adult, Crisis Intervention, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Military Personnel, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Patient Care Planning, Suicide, Attempted, Young Adult, 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