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 Jun 27:15:1362928.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1362928. eCollection 2024.

Comparison of two suicide screening instruments for identifying high-risk individuals in prison

Joscha Hausam  1 , Daniela Calvano  1 , Annette Opitz-Welke  1   2
Affiliations

Comparison of two suicide screening instruments for identifying high-risk individuals in prison

Joscha Hausam et al. Front Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Increased suicide rates in prison are a serious concern. Early identification of inmates at risk is a component of effective suicide prevention. The present study examined two suicide screening instruments in a sample of men in the Berlin, Germany, prison system (n = 289). The Screening for Initial Risk Assessment (SIRAS) identified significantly more high-risk inmates than the Vienna Instrument for Suicidality in Correctional Institutions (VISCI) (66 vs. 24). The results further show that the agreement in the classification was evident only in inmates with suicidal ideation, but was otherwise quite low. This can be explained by the fact that the instruments differ in terms of the risk factors taken into account. Finally, it was found that inmates classified as high risk received more monitoring and psychiatric or psychological support, which supports the construct validity of the instruments. As there were no deaths by suicide in the sample, no statistical information on the predictive validity of the instruments could be provided. Although research in this area is challenging, methodologically sound studies are needed to inform practice.

Keywords: SIRAS; VISCI; offender; prison; suicide; suicide prevention; suicide screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Fazel S, Grann M, Kling B, Hawton K. Prison suicide in 12 countries: an ecological study of 861 suicides during 2003–2007. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. (2011). doi: 10.1007/s00127-010-0184-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Opitz-Welke A, Bennefeld-Kersten K, Konrad N, Welke J. Prison suicides in Germany from 2000 to 2011. Int J Law Psychiatry. (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2013.06.018 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fazel S, Ramesh T, Hawton K. Suicide in prisons: an international study of prevalence and contributory factors. Lancet Psychiatry. (2017). doi: 10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30430-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Favril L. Epidemiology, risk factors, and prevention of suicidal thoughts and behaviour in prisons: A literature review. Psychologica Belgica. (2021). doi: 10.5334/pb.1072 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wolfersdorf M, Etzersdorfer E. Suizid und Suizidprävention [Suicide and suicide prevention]. Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer Verlag; (2011). doi: 10.17433/978-3-17-022702-6 - DOI