Are suicide risk scales sensitive to change? A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Clinician- or self-administered scales are frequently used to assist in detecting risk of death by suicide and to determine the effectiveness of interventions. No recent review studies have examined whether these scales are sensitive to change. We conducted a scoping review to identify suicide risk scales that are sensitive to change. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched Medline and Excerpta Medica Database from inception through March 17, 2022, to identify randomized trials, pooled analysis, quasi-experimental studies, and cohort studies reporting on sensitivity to change of suicide risk scales. We assessed sensitivity to change by examining internal and external responsiveness. Internal responsiveness evaluates whether the scale measures changes in suicide-related symptoms in response to an intervention while external responsiveness assess whether changes in the scale correspond to changes in risk of suicide. We summarized findings across studies using descriptive analysis. RESULTS: Among 38 eligible scales, we identified 27 scales that included items that were modifiable to change. However, only 7 scales had been studied to determine their sensitivity to change based on internal or external responsiveness. While the results of studies suggested that 6 scales have internal responsiveness, none of the included studies confirmed that scales have external responsiveness. DISCUSSION: A few suicide risk scales are internally responsive and may be useful in a clinical or research setting. It is unclear, however, whether changes in scores correspond to an actual change in suicide risk. Future research should confirm the external responsiveness of scales using robust metrics including suicide mortality.

Tools to Detect Risk of Death by Suicide: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: There is limited knowledge about the ability of instruments to detect risk of suicide in a range of settings. Prior reviews have not considered whether the utility of instruments depends on prior probability of risk. We performed a systematic review to determine the diagnostic accuracy of instruments to detect risk of suicide in adults using likelihood ratio analysis. This method aids evaluation of prior probabilities of risk.Data Sources: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Scopus from inception through January 19, 2021.Study Selection: We included clinical trials, observational studies, and quasi-experimental studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of instruments to detect risk of suicide in adults. There were no language restrictions.Data Extraction: Three reviewers in duplicate assessed full texts to determine eligibility and extracted data from included studies. Positive (LR+) and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) and 95% CIs were calculated for each instrument.Results: Thirty studies met inclusion criteria. Most instruments showed minimal utility to detect or rule out risk of suicide, with LR+ ≤ 2.0 and LR- ≥ 0.5. A few instruments had a high utility for improving risk detection in emergency department, inpatient mental health, and prison settings when patients scored above the cutoff (LR+ > 10). For example, among patients discharged from an emergency department, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale-Clinical Practice Screener had a LR+ of 10.3 (95% CI, 6.3-16.8) at 3-month follow-up. The clinical utility of the instruments depends on the pretest probability of suicide in the setting. Because studies spanned over 6 decades, the findings are at risk for secular trends.Discussion: We identified several instruments that may hold promise for detecting risk of suicide in emergency department, inpatient mental health, or prison settings. The utility of the instrument hinges, in part, on baseline suicide risk.Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42021285528.