Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Mar 20;24(1):217.
doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05647-w.

Evaluating the clinical utility of an easily applicable prediction model of suicide attempts, newly developed and validated with a general community sample of adults

Affiliations

Evaluating the clinical utility of an easily applicable prediction model of suicide attempts, newly developed and validated with a general community sample of adults

Marcel Miché et al. BMC Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Background: A suicide attempt (SA) is a clinically serious action. Researchers have argued that reducing long-term SA risk may be possible, provided that at-risk individuals are identified and receive adequate treatment. Algorithms may accurately identify at-risk individuals. However, the clinical utility of algorithmically estimated long-term SA risk has never been the predominant focus of any study.

Methods: The data of this report stem from CoLaus|PsyCoLaus, a prospective longitudinal study of general community adults from Lausanne, Switzerland. Participants (N = 4,097; Mage = 54 years, range: 36-86; 54% female) were assessed up to four times, starting in 2003, approximately every 4-5 years. Long-term individual SA risk was prospectively predicted, using logistic regression. This algorithm's clinical utility was assessed by net benefit (NB). Clinical utility expresses a tool's benefit after having taken this tool's potential harm into account. Net benefit is obtained, first, by weighing the false positives, e.g., 400 individuals, at the risk threshold, e.g., 1%, using its odds (odds of 1% yields 1/(100-1) = 1/99), then by subtracting the result (400*1/99 = 4.04) from the true positives, e.g., 5 individuals (5-4.04), and by dividing the result (0.96) by the sample size, e.g., 800 (0.96/800). All results are based on 100 internal cross-validations. The predictors used in this study were: lifetime SA, any lifetime mental disorder, sex, and age.

Results: SA at any of the three follow-up study assessments was reported by 1.2%. For a range of seven a priori selected threshold probabilities, ranging between 0.5% and 2%, logistic regression showed highest overall NB in 97.4% of all 700 internal cross-validations (100 for each selected threshold probability).

Conclusion: Despite the strong class imbalance of the outcome (98.8% no, 1.2% yes) and only four predictors, clinical utility was observed. That is, using the logistic regression model for clinical decision making provided the most true positives, without an increase of false positives, compared to all competing decision strategies. Clinical utility is one among several important prerequisites of implementing an algorithm in routine practice, and may possibly guide a clinicians' treatment decision making to reduce long-term individual SA risk. The novel metric NB may become a standard performance measure, because the a priori invested clinical considerations enable clinicians to interpret the results directly.

Keywords: Adult; Algorithm; Clinical utility; Decision support; Net benefit; Suicide attempt.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Median net benefit among 100 test subsamples, based on the resampling procedure, which was the same for each of the seven selected threshold probabilities. The solid line shows the logistic regression model, and the dot-dashed line shows the classification and regression tree (CART) model. The harm-to-benefit ratios are rounded to one decimal place (Inf = infinity, expressing an infinite harm to missing any true positive subject in the entire population)

Similar articles

References

    1. Bagge CL, Littlefield AK, Wiegand TJ, Hawkins E, Trim RS, Schumacher JA et al. A controlled examination of acute warning signs for suicide attempts among hospitalized patients. Psychol Med. 2023 [cited 2023 Apr 2];53(7):2768–76. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0033291721004712/type.... - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bommersbach TJ, Rosenheck RA, Rhee TG. National trends of mental health care among US adults who attempted suicide in the past 12 months. JAMA Psychiatry. 2022 Mar 1 [cited 2023 Apr 2];79(3):219. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2787969. - PMC - PubMed
    1. American Psychological Association. APA Dictionary of Psychology. attempted suicide. 2013 [cited 2024 Jan 16]. Available from: https://dictionary.apa.org/attempted-suicide.
    1. Inagaki M, Kawashima Y, Yonemoto N, Yamada M. Active contact and follow-up interventions to prevent repeat suicide attempts during high-risk periods among patients admitted to emergency departments for suicidal behavior: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Dec [cited 2023 May 26];19(1):44. Available from: https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-019-2017-7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meerwijk EL, Parekh A, Oquendo MA, Allen IE, Franck LS, Lee KA. Direct versus indirect psychosocial and behavioural interventions to prevent suicide and suicide attempts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016 Jun [cited 2023 May 26];3(6):544–54. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S221503661600064X. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources