Testing the psychometric properties of the risk-rescue rating scale: a lethality measure for suicide attempts.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY International Journal of Mental Health Systems Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1186/s13033-025-00662-0
Tormod Stangeland, Ketil Hanssen-Bauer, Johan Siqveland
{"title":"Testing the psychometric properties of the risk-rescue rating scale: a lethality measure for suicide attempts.","authors":"Tormod Stangeland, Ketil Hanssen-Bauer, Johan Siqveland","doi":"10.1186/s13033-025-00662-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health personnel lack a common standard for assessing lethality of suicide attempts. This may lead to inconsistent assessments and unclear reports about suicide attempts. We argue that the Risk-Rescue Rating Scale (RRRS) may help in resolving this problem. It is a measure based on observable indications of the medical danger of a suicide attempt and of the patient's efforts to avoid or achieve rescue. The instrument is a clinician-rated supplement to self-reports and can be administered in a few minutes and learned in a single brief teaching session. We adapted the RRRS for contemporary use in a Norwegian acute adolescent mental health service clinic. We developed a training program for clinicians, a user manual, and a series of five video-based role-played interview cases for reliability testing. In this study, we recruited 28 clinicians with professional backgrounds typical of Norwegian mental health personnel. They rated five role-played video interviews using the RRRS and the well-established interview instrument the Suicide Intent Scale (SIS) and obtained 140 sets of scores. We estimated the interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) to be .93 for the RRRS and .94 for the SIS, both excellent levels. Correlation was .80 between the RRRS and SIS items that were similar to the RRRS and .53 for SIS items measuring other topics, indicating good concurrent and discriminant validity. Adopting a common standard for communicating about suicide attempts can improve clinical practice, and the RRRS may prove to be a reliable and practical candidate for this task.</p>","PeriodicalId":47752,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Mental Health Systems","volume":"19 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11780785/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Mental Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-025-00662-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health personnel lack a common standard for assessing lethality of suicide attempts. This may lead to inconsistent assessments and unclear reports about suicide attempts. We argue that the Risk-Rescue Rating Scale (RRRS) may help in resolving this problem. It is a measure based on observable indications of the medical danger of a suicide attempt and of the patient's efforts to avoid or achieve rescue. The instrument is a clinician-rated supplement to self-reports and can be administered in a few minutes and learned in a single brief teaching session. We adapted the RRRS for contemporary use in a Norwegian acute adolescent mental health service clinic. We developed a training program for clinicians, a user manual, and a series of five video-based role-played interview cases for reliability testing. In this study, we recruited 28 clinicians with professional backgrounds typical of Norwegian mental health personnel. They rated five role-played video interviews using the RRRS and the well-established interview instrument the Suicide Intent Scale (SIS) and obtained 140 sets of scores. We estimated the interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) to be .93 for the RRRS and .94 for the SIS, both excellent levels. Correlation was .80 between the RRRS and SIS items that were similar to the RRRS and .53 for SIS items measuring other topics, indicating good concurrent and discriminant validity. Adopting a common standard for communicating about suicide attempts can improve clinical practice, and the RRRS may prove to be a reliable and practical candidate for this task.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测试风险救助评级量表的心理测量特性:自杀企图的致命性测量。
卫生人员缺乏评估自杀企图致命性的共同标准。这可能导致不一致的评估和不明确的自杀企图报告。我们认为风险救援评级量表(RRRS)可能有助于解决这一问题。这是一种基于自杀企图的医学危险的可观察到的迹象和病人努力避免或获得救助的措施。该仪器是对自我报告的临床评价补充,可以在几分钟内使用,并在一个简短的教学环节中学习。我们将RRRS用于挪威急性青少年心理健康服务诊所的当代使用。我们为临床医生制定了一个培训计划,一个用户手册,以及一系列五个基于视频的角色扮演访谈案例,用于可靠性测试。在这项研究中,我们招募了28名具有挪威精神卫生人员专业背景的临床医生。他们使用RRRS和完善的自杀意图量表(SIS)对5个角色扮演视频访谈进行评分,并获得140组分数。我们估计RRRS的组间信度(组内相关系数[ICC])为0.93,SIS为0.94,均为优秀水平。与RRRS相似的SIS项目与RRRS的相关系数为0.80,测量其他主题的SIS项目与RRRS的相关系数为0.53,表明具有良好的并发效度和区分效度。采用一个共同的标准来沟通自杀企图可以改善临床实践,RRRS可能被证明是这项任务的可靠和实用的候选者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.80%
发文量
52
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Empowering mental health professionals in asynchronous online psychotherapy with GenAI. Patterns and predictors of the transition between minimally adequate treatment and effective treatment coverage for mental disorders: results from the World Mental Health Survey. Impact of housing price increases on depression and stress in urban Iran: a case study from district 18 of Tehran. Exploring the lived experiences and coping strategies of mental health caregivers in Ethiopia: implications for supportive interventions. Following the youth patient journey in the mental health help-seeking process in Bogotá, Colombia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1