TY - JOUR
T1 - Future Directions for Optimizing Clinical Science & Safety
T2 - Ecological Momentary Assessments in Suicide/Self-Harm Research
AU - Bai, Sunhye
AU - Babeva, Kalina N.
AU - Kim, Michael I.
AU - Asarnow, Joan R.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the American Psychological Foundation under Grant [20183689]. Authors thank the many colleagues and participants who contributed to the development of this work.
Funding Information:
Dr. Bai discloses grant and research support from the National Institute of Mental Health and the American Psychological Foundation. Dr. Babeva and Mr. Kim do not have any conflicts to disclose. Dr. Asarnow discloses grant, research, or other support from the National Institute of Mental Health, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (Division 53 of the APA), and the Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health. She has served as a consultant on quality improvement for depression and suicide/self-harm prevention, serves on the Scientific Council of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, and the Scientific Advisory Board of the Klingenstein Third Generation Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright © 2020 Society of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Objective: Mobile technology has facilitated rapid growth in the use of intensive longitudinal methods (ILM), such as ecological momentary assessments (EMA), that help identify proximal indicators of risk in real-time and real-world settings. To realize the potential of ILM for advancing knowledge regarding suicidal and self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITB), this article aims to provide a systematic review of safety protocols in published ILM studies of youth SITB, highlight considerations for maximizing safety, and offer an agenda for future research. Method: We conducted a systematic review of risk management strategies in published studies applying ILM to assess SITB in youth. Results: The review indicated diverse safety strategies, with near-universal use of preventive strategies before beginning ILM surveys. Strategies for participant protection during the survey period included automated protective messages to seek support when elevated risk was detected; and staff-led strategies, some of which included active outreach to parents/caregivers when youth responses suggested elevated risk. Studies assessing suicidality all provided staff-led follow-up. There was minimal information on youth reactivity to intensive longitudinal assessments of SITB. Available evidence did not suggest increased suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, self-injurious behavior, or deaths with ILM. Conclusions: Based on the review, we propose a research agenda to inform safety procedures in ILM research and a model for managing risk in future ILM studies of youth SITB. This model begins with a needs assessment and proposes a “goodness of fit” approach for matching safety procedures to the specific needs of each ILM study.
AB - Objective: Mobile technology has facilitated rapid growth in the use of intensive longitudinal methods (ILM), such as ecological momentary assessments (EMA), that help identify proximal indicators of risk in real-time and real-world settings. To realize the potential of ILM for advancing knowledge regarding suicidal and self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITB), this article aims to provide a systematic review of safety protocols in published ILM studies of youth SITB, highlight considerations for maximizing safety, and offer an agenda for future research. Method: We conducted a systematic review of risk management strategies in published studies applying ILM to assess SITB in youth. Results: The review indicated diverse safety strategies, with near-universal use of preventive strategies before beginning ILM surveys. Strategies for participant protection during the survey period included automated protective messages to seek support when elevated risk was detected; and staff-led strategies, some of which included active outreach to parents/caregivers when youth responses suggested elevated risk. Studies assessing suicidality all provided staff-led follow-up. There was minimal information on youth reactivity to intensive longitudinal assessments of SITB. Available evidence did not suggest increased suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, self-injurious behavior, or deaths with ILM. Conclusions: Based on the review, we propose a research agenda to inform safety procedures in ILM research and a model for managing risk in future ILM studies of youth SITB. This model begins with a needs assessment and proposes a “goodness of fit” approach for matching safety procedures to the specific needs of each ILM study.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85092548564&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85092548564&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/15374416.2020.1815208
DO - 10.1080/15374416.2020.1815208
M3 - Article
C2 - 33047987
AN - SCOPUS:85092548564
VL - 50
SP - 141
EP - 153
JO - Journal of clinical child psychology
JF - Journal of clinical child psychology
SN - 1537-4416
IS - 1
ER -