Raffaella Calati1, Lisa J Cohen2, Allison Schuck3, Dorin Levy4, Sarah Bloch-Elkouby2, Shira Barzilay2, Paul J Rosenfield5, Igor Galynker2. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Department of Adult Psychiatry, Nîmes University Hospital, Nîmes, France. Electronic address: raffaella.calati@gmail.com. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai St. Luke's and Mount Sinai West, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai St. Luke's and Mount Sinai West, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reliable diagnostic tools for the short-term suicide risk assessment are needed. The recently developed multi-informant Modular Assessment of Risk for Imminent Suicide (MARIS) includes four modules: two are patient-rated and two clinician-rated. The patient-rated modules assess a proposed pre-suicidal cognitive/emotional state (Module 1) as well as patients' attitudes towards suicide (Module 2). The clinician-rated modules assess traditional suicide risk factors (Module 3) and clinicians' emotional responses to the patient (Module 4). METHODS: With the aim of extending our previous preliminary proof of concept findings, the MARIS was administered to 618 psychiatric patients (167 inpatients, 451 outpatients) and their clinicians (N = 115). Patients were assessed with a battery including the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Four outcomes were considered: lifetime and past month suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STB) (0-10 point scale) and suicidal behaviors (SB) (0-5 point scale). Reliability and concurrent, convergent/divergent and incremental validity were assessed. RESULTS: Good internal consistency was found for modules 1 and 4 (Cronbach's α: 0.87 and 0.86, respectively) but not for the others. Module 1's total score positively correlated with lifetime STB/SB and past month STB (all p ≤ 0.003). Module 4's total score positively correlated with all four outcomes (all p < 0.001). Modules 1 and 4 showed additional capacity to detect patients' lifetime and past month STB/SB beyond other associated factors. LIMITATIONS: Lack of prospective assessment. Inpatients were evaluated at discharge, whereas outpatients at intake. CONCLUSIONS: These findings supported the utility of multiple data sources to identify patients at imminent suicide risk, and in particular clinicians' emotional responses.
BACKGROUND: Reliable diagnostic tools for the short-term suicide risk assessment are needed. The recently developed multi-informant Modular Assessment of Risk for Imminent Suicide (MARIS) includes four modules: two are patient-rated and two clinician-rated. The patient-rated modules assess a proposed pre-suicidal cognitive/emotional state (Module 1) as well as patients' attitudes towards suicide (Module 2). The clinician-rated modules assess traditional suicide risk factors (Module 3) and clinicians' emotional responses to the patient (Module 4). METHODS: With the aim of extending our previous preliminary proof of concept findings, the MARIS was administered to 618 psychiatricpatients (167 inpatients, 451 outpatients) and their clinicians (N = 115). Patients were assessed with a battery including the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Four outcomes were considered: lifetime and past month suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STB) (0-10 point scale) and suicidal behaviors (SB) (0-5 point scale). Reliability and concurrent, convergent/divergent and incremental validity were assessed. RESULTS: Good internal consistency was found for modules 1 and 4 (Cronbach's α: 0.87 and 0.86, respectively) but not for the others. Module 1's total score positively correlated with lifetime STB/SB and past month STB (all p ≤ 0.003). Module 4's total score positively correlated with all four outcomes (all p < 0.001). Modules 1 and 4 showed additional capacity to detect patients' lifetime and past month STB/SB beyond other associated factors. LIMITATIONS: Lack of prospective assessment. Inpatients were evaluated at discharge, whereas outpatients at intake. CONCLUSIONS: These findings supported the utility of multiple data sources to identify patients at imminent suicide risk, and in particular clinicians' emotional responses.
Authors: Michal Ptaszynski; Monika Zasko-Zielinska; Michal Marcinczuk; Gniewosz Leliwa; Marcin Fortuna; Kamil Soliwoda; Ida Dziublewska; Olimpia Hubert; Pawel Skrzek; Jan Piesiewicz; Paula Karbowska; Maria Dowgiallo; Juuso Eronen; Patrycja Tempska; Maciej Brochocki; Marek Godny; Michal Wroczynski Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Antonella Granieri; Silvia Casale; Maria Domenica Sauta; Isabella Giulia Franzoi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-19 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Tyler Pia; Igor Galynker; Allison Schuck; Courtney Sinclair; Gelan Ying; Raffaella Calati Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-22 Impact factor: 3.390