Cited by 80Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesDigital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and Access

Effectiveness of a Web-Based Self-Help Program for Suicidal Thinking in an Australian Community Sample: Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
van Spijker, Bregje AJ, Werner-Seidler, Aliza, Batterham, Philip J, Mackinnon, Andrew, Calear, Alison L, Gosling, John A, Reynolds, Julia, Kerkhof, Ad JFM +3 more·2018·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Treatment for suicidality can be delivered online, but evidence for its effectiveness is needed. OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to examine the effectiveness of an online self-help intervention for suicidal thinking compared to an attention-matched control program. METHODS: A 2-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted with assessment at postintervention, 6, and, 12 months. Through media and community advertizing, 418 suicidal adults were recruited to an online portal and were delivered the intervention program (Living with Deadly Thoughts) or a control program (Living Well). The primary outcome was severity of suicidal thinking, assessed using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analyses showed significant reductions in the severity of suicidal thinking at postintervention, 6, and 12 months. However, no overall group differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: Living with Deadly Thoughts was of no greater effectiveness than the control group. Further investigation into the conditions under which this program may be beneficial is now needed. Limitations of this trial include it being underpowered given the effect size ultimately observed, a high attrition rate, and the inability of determining suicide deaths or of verifying self-reported suicide attempts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000410752; https://www.anzctr.org.au/ Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=364016 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6vK5FvQXy); Universal Trial Number U1111-1141-6595.

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 · 10.2196/jmir.8595

Cites

36 of 36 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?

  • A sample size of 189 for each condition (total N=378) will be required to detect the expected effect size with a power of 0.80 and alpha of .05, based on an attrition rate of 30% and a 0.50 correlation between pre- and posttest scores.

    “Based on an attrition rate of 30% [28,29] and a 0.50 correlation between pre- and posttest scores of the primary outcome, a sample size of 189 for each condition (total N=378) will be required to detect the expected effect size with a power of 0.80 and alpha of .05.”
  • Internet-administered self-help treatments may offer approaches for hard-to-reach groups, but these findings were not replicated in a similar trial.

    “Another study showed that Internet-administered self-help treatments may offer approaches for hard-to-reach groups, such as persons who have had negative health care experiences or persons with financial or time constraints that impede access to care,73 but these findings were not replicated in a similar trial.74”

    From Suicide (2020) · cites this paper as [74]

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: 1

  1. [31]American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th Edition 2013 Arlington American Psychiatric Association

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Spijker, B. A., Werner-Seidler, A., Batterham, P. J., Mackinnon, A., Calear, A. L., Gosling, J. A., Reynolds, J., Kerkhof, A. J., Solomon, D., Shand, F., & Christensen, H.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Black Dog Institute (AU)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Corresponding author
Christensen, Helen
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2018-02-14
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
e15
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2786928256
Cited by
80
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6
FWCI
12.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1083311, 1122544, 1042580, 1046317, 1056964)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
suicidal ideation, online self-help intervention, online intervention, suicide prevention, Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale, intervention effectiveness, attrition
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Australia, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self-Help Groups, Internet, 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