Risk Factors,Warning Signs,and Drivers of Suicide: What Are They,How Do They Differ,and Why Does It Matter?

Research investigating suicide attempts and deaths by suicide has yielded many specific risk factors and warning signs for future suicidal behaviors. Yet, even though these variables are each valuable for suicide prevention efforts, they may be limited in their applicability to clinical practice. The differences among risk factors, warning signs, and “drivers,” which are person‐specific variables that lead individuals to desire death by suicide, are highlighted. The scarce evidence on drivers is described and specific recommendations for conducting future drivers‐focused research and targeting them in clinical practice are suggested.     

Measuring Associations of the Department of Veterans Affairs' Suicide Prevention Campaign on the Use of Crisis Support Services

Campaigns have become popular in public health approaches to suicide prevention; however, limited empirical investigation of their impact on behavior has been conducted. To address this gap, utilization patterns of crisis support services associated with the Department of Veterans Affairs' Veterans Crisis Line (VCL) suicide prevention campaign were examined. Daily call data for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, VCL, and 1‐800‐SUICIDE were modeled using a novel semi‐varying coefficient method. Analyses reveal significant increases in call volume to both targeted and broad resources during the campaign. Findings underscore the need for further research to refine measurement of the effects of these suicide prevention efforts.     

Self‐Efficacy to Avoid Suicidal Action: Factor Structure and Convergent Validity among Adults in Substance Use Disorder Treatment

Individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) are at high risk of suicidal behaviors, highlighting the need for an improved understanding of potentially influential factors. One such domain is self‐efficacy to manage suicidal thoughts and impulses. Psychometric data about the Self‐Efficacy to Avoid Suicidal Action (SEASA) Scale within a sample of adults seeking SUD treatment (N = 464) is provided. Exploratory factor analysis supported a single self‐efficacy construct. Lower SEASA scores, or lower self‐efficacy, were reported in those with more severe suicidal ideation and those with more suicide attempts, providing evidence for convergent validity. Implications of measuring self‐efficacy in the context of suicide risk assessment are discussed.     

Using Structured Telephone Follow‐up Assessments to Improve Suicide‐Related Adverse Event Detection

Adverse event (AE) detection and reporting practices were compared during the first phase of the Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow‐up Evaluation (ED‐SAFE), a suicide intervention study. Data were collected using a combination of chart reviews and structured telephone follow‐up assessments postenrollment. Beyond chart reviews, structured telephone follow‐up assessments identified 45% of the total AEs in our study. Notably, detection of suicide attempts significantly varied by approach with 53 (18%) detected by chart review, 173 (59%) by structured telephone follow‐up assessments, and 69 (23%) marked as duplicates. Findings provide support for utilizing multiple methods for more robust AE detection in suicide research.     

Concerns of Older Veteran Callers to the Veterans Crisis Line

When the Veterans Crisis Line (VCL) was implemented, it was uncertain if veterans, and particularly older male veterans, would utilize the service. We examined VCL use by a growing group of veterans at increased risk for suicide: those aged 60 and older. Real‐time clinical data were gathered from a weekly random sampling of calls. Approximately 25% of calls were from veterans aged 60 or older; over 80% reported benefit from the call. Several significant differences in presenting concerns between older and younger callers were found. Targeted outreach to encourage older veterans to use the VCL is suggested.