• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Suicide risk assessment in a large public mental health service: do suicide risk classifications identify those at risk?

    Author(s)
    Wyder, Marianne
    Ray, Manaan Kar
    Russell, Samara
    Kinsella, Kieran
    Crompton, David
    van den Akker, Jeremy
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Wyder, Marianne
    Crompton, David R.
    Year published
    2021
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    INTRODUCTION: Risk assessment tools are routinely used to identify patients at high risk. There is increasing evidence that these tools may not be sufficiently accurate to determine the risk of suicide of people, particularly those being treated in community mental health settings. METHODS: An outcome analysis for case serials of people who died by suicide between January 2014 and December 2016 and had contact with a public mental health service within 31 days prior to their death. RESULTS: Of the 68 people who had contact, 70.5% had a formal risk assessment. Seventy-five per cent were classified as low risk of suicide. None ...
    View more >
    INTRODUCTION: Risk assessment tools are routinely used to identify patients at high risk. There is increasing evidence that these tools may not be sufficiently accurate to determine the risk of suicide of people, particularly those being treated in community mental health settings. METHODS: An outcome analysis for case serials of people who died by suicide between January 2014 and December 2016 and had contact with a public mental health service within 31 days prior to their death. RESULTS: Of the 68 people who had contact, 70.5% had a formal risk assessment. Seventy-five per cent were classified as low risk of suicide. None were identified as being at high risk. While individual risk factors were identified, these did not allow to differentiate between patients classified as low or medium. DISCUSSION: Risk categorisation contributes little to patient safety. Given the dynamic nature of suicide risk, a risk assessment should focus on modifiable risk factors and safety planning rather than risk prediction. CONCLUSION: The prediction value of suicide risk assessment tools is limited. The risk classifications of high, medium or low could become the basis of denying necessary treatment to many and delivering unnecessary treatment to some and should not be used for care allocation.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Australas Psychiatry
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1039856220984032
    Note
    This publication has been entered as an advanced online version in Griffith Research Online.
    Subject
    Medical and Health Sciences
    Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
    public mental health service
    risk classification
    suicide
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/401859
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander