Premium
Use of the Columbia‐Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C‐ SSRS ) in a large sample of Veterans receiving mental health services in the Veterans Health Administration
Author(s) -
Katz Ira,
Barry Catherine N.,
Cooper Samantha A.,
Kasprow Wesley J.,
Hoff Rani A.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
suicide and life‐threatening behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.544
H-Index - 90
eISSN - 1943-278X
pISSN - 0363-0234
DOI - 10.1111/sltb.12584
Subject(s) - concordance , mental health , medicine , logistic regression , medical record , suicidal ideation , predictive validity , scale (ratio) , rating scale , clinical psychology , psychiatry , concurrent validity , suicide prevention , poison control , psychology , psychometrics , medical emergency , developmental psychology , physics , quantum mechanics , internal consistency
Objective To evaluate the associations of self‐reports of suicidal ideation and behavior using the Columbia‐Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C‐ SSRS ) in a survey of patients receiving mental health services in the Veterans Health Administration ( VHA ) with reports of attempts documented in medical records and administrative data. Method The C‐ SSRS was administered to 15,373 Veterans in the Veterans Outcome Assessment ( VOA ) survey. Concurrent validity was evaluated by comparing self‐reports from the past 3 months with VHA records. Predictive validity was evaluated by logistic regression models using attempts over the subsequent 3 months as the outcome. Results Tests of concurrent validity found strong associations between self‐reports and attempts documented in VHA records, but there were substantial numbers of discordant responses. In tests of predictive validity, area under the ROC curve for predicting future attempts was >0.8. There were differences in the distribution of responses and of psychometric properties across VHA mental health programs. Conclusions Findings support the value of screening and the validity of the self‐reports based on the C‐ SSRS , but limitations in concordance with medical records and variability across programs suggest the need for clinical judgment in interpreting responses.