Implicit Cognition Tests for the Assessment of Suicide Risk: a Systematic Review

被引:19
|
作者
Moreno, Manon [1 ,2 ]
Guiterrez-Rojas, Luis [3 ,4 ]
Porras-Segovia, Alejandro [1 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Inst Invest Sanitaria Fdn Jimenez Diaz, Madrid, Spain
[2] Univ Autonoma Madrid, Madrid, Spain
[3] Hosp Univ Clin San Cecilio, Dept Psychiat, Granada, Spain
[4] Univ Granada, Sch Med, Dept Psychiat, Granada, Spain
[5] Hosp Univ Rey Juan Carlos, Dept Psychiat, Mostoles, Spain
关键词
Suicide; Suicide attempt; Suicide ideation; Implicit; Cognition; Assessment; ASSOCIATION TEST; ATTENTIONAL BIAS; STROOP TASK; ATTEMPTERS; IDEATION; BEHAVIOR; INDIVIDUALS; ATTITUDES; DEFICITS; STIMULI;
D O I
10.1007/s11920-022-01316-5
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
Purpose of Review Suicide risk assessment is a challenge in clinical practice. Implicit measures may present with advantages with respect to explicit methods, and therefore may be useful for the assessment of suicide risk. We conducted a systematic review of 2 databases (PubMed and EMBASE) about implicit tests that measure suicide risk to explore their validity and reliability. Recent Findings Initial research revealed 321 articles. After the selection process, 31 articles were included in the review. The most death-related implicit cognition test used was the Death/Suicide Implicit association test (D/S IAT), followed by the Suicide Stroop Task. The Suicide Affect Misattribution Procedure (S-AMP) and the Death version of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (D-IRAP) were also used. Summary We found that the measures reviewed were generally valid for the assessment of past and future suicidal thoughts and behaviors, with statistically significant results regarding retrospective and prospective associations.
引用
收藏
页码:141 / 159
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Implicit Cognition Tests for the Assessment of Suicide Risk: a Systematic Review
    Manon Moreno
    Luis Gutiérrez-Rojas
    Alejandro Porras-Segovia
    Current Psychiatry Reports, 2022, 24 : 141 - 159
  • [2] Suicide Risk Assessment: Trust an Implicit Probe or Listen to the Patient?
    Harrison, Dominique P.
    Stritzke, Werner G. K.
    Fay, Nicolas
    Hudaib, Abdul-Rahman
    PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2018, 30 (10) : 1317 - 1329
  • [3] The SAD PERSONS Scale for Suicide Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review
    Warden, Sarah
    Spiwak, Rae
    Sareen, Jitender
    Bolton, James M.
    ARCHIVES OF SUICIDE RESEARCH, 2014, 18 (04) : 313 - 326
  • [4] Are Clinicians Confident in the Risk Assessment of Suicide?: A Systematic Literature Review
    Airey, Nicola D.
    Iqbal, Zaffer
    ARCHIVES OF SUICIDE RESEARCH, 2022, 26 (01) : 1 - 13
  • [5] Demoralization in suicide: A systematic review
    Costanza, Alessandra
    Vasileios, Chytas
    Ambrosetti, Julia
    Shah, Sanam
    Amerio, Andrea
    Aguglia, Andrea
    Serafini, Gianluca
    Piguet, Valerie
    Luthy, Christophe
    Cedraschi, Christine
    Bondolfi, Guido
    Berardelli, Isabella
    JOURNAL OF PSYCHOSOMATIC RESEARCH, 2022, 157
  • [6] Suicide and schizophrenia: a systematic review of rates and risk factors
    Hor, Kahyee
    Taylor, Mark
    JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2010, 24 (11) : 81 - 90
  • [7] Religion and Suicide Risk: A Systematic Review
    Lawrence, Ryan E.
    Oquendo, Maria A.
    Stanley, Barbara
    ARCHIVES OF SUICIDE RESEARCH, 2016, 20 (01) : 1 - 21
  • [8] A suicide attentional bias as implicit cognitive marker of suicide vulnerability in a high-risk sample
    Bruedern, Juliane
    Spangenberg, Lena
    Stein, Maria
    Gold, Helena
    Forkmann, Thomas
    Stengler, Katarina
    Glaesmer, Heide
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY, 2024, 15
  • [9] The death-implicit association test and suicide attempts: a systematic review and meta-analysis of discriminative and prospective utility
    Sohn, Maya N.
    McMorris, Carly A.
    Bray, Signe
    McGirr, Alexander
    PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE, 2021, 51 (11) : 1789 - 1798
  • [10] Implicit Measures of Suicide Risk in a Military Sample
    Chiurliza, Bruno
    Hagan, Christopher R.
    Rogers, Megan L.
    Podlogar, Matthew C.
    Hom, Melanie A.
    Stanley, Ian H.
    Joiner, Thomas E.
    ASSESSMENT, 2018, 25 (05) : 667 - 676