Tintypographer
I am done as of 4-21-2023. Somewhere I am no more
- Apr 29, 2020
- 470
An article in Frontiers of Public Health discusses a review of the effectiveness of suicide hotlines
Front Public Health. 2019; 7: 399.
Published online 2020 Jan 17. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00399
PMCID: PMC6978712
PMID: 32010655
Adam S. Hoffberg,1,* Kelly A. Stearns-Yoder,1,2 and Lisa A. Brenner1,2,3
Some key findings as you read the rather statistical article are that one study showed that paid professionals are.more effective than volunteers, there is little evidence to show that there are decreased suicides from hotlines but there are multiple outcomes that show that people become less stressed and anxious during the course of the call as a primary outcome.
THis is not to be interpreted that suicide hotlines are not effective which is absolutely not a conclusion only that their effectiveness is difficult to measure and hard to prove.
FRom.the article:
Summary of Main Findings
Although the state of the science regarding the effectiveness of crisis response services remains limited, overall results provide support for such services. However, such support is largely from uncontrolled studies indicating the positive effect of crisis line calls on immediate proximal outcome measures (e.g., changes in distress over the course of the crisis line call) and short-term distal effects. Many studies evaluating distal effects after the crisis service suffered from substantial dropout, thereby increasing the risk of bias interpreting findings. However, some distal studies utilizing administrative data were able to retain complete follow-up data [e.g., suicide mortality data (38); medical records (31)], but they did not benefit from participant self-report to contextualize findings. Cautious interpretation of Chan et al. findings is warranted. While the study found significantly higher rates of suicide among crisis line callers, this is not necessarily an indication of lack of crisis line effectiveness. Rather, this study confirmed that crisis line callers are at increased risk for suicide, reinforcing the need for high quality wrap-around services and follow-up care to promote recovery and well-being. While reliability of outcome measurement has been shown in some approaches (e.g., silent monitoring, rating transcripts), further research is needed to establish validity in outcome ascertainment (e.g., measure SDV using standardized assessment tools). Promising approaches to outcome measurement have incorporated validated assessment tools, often modified for brevity (e.g., CCORS, MINI, POMS, BDI); however, more research is needed.
Front Public Health. 2019; 7: 399.
Published online 2020 Jan 17. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00399
PMCID: PMC6978712
PMID: 32010655
Adam S. Hoffberg,1,* Kelly A. Stearns-Yoder,1,2 and Lisa A. Brenner1,2,3
Some key findings as you read the rather statistical article are that one study showed that paid professionals are.more effective than volunteers, there is little evidence to show that there are decreased suicides from hotlines but there are multiple outcomes that show that people become less stressed and anxious during the course of the call as a primary outcome.
THis is not to be interpreted that suicide hotlines are not effective which is absolutely not a conclusion only that their effectiveness is difficult to measure and hard to prove.
FRom.the article:
Summary of Main Findings
Although the state of the science regarding the effectiveness of crisis response services remains limited, overall results provide support for such services. However, such support is largely from uncontrolled studies indicating the positive effect of crisis line calls on immediate proximal outcome measures (e.g., changes in distress over the course of the crisis line call) and short-term distal effects. Many studies evaluating distal effects after the crisis service suffered from substantial dropout, thereby increasing the risk of bias interpreting findings. However, some distal studies utilizing administrative data were able to retain complete follow-up data [e.g., suicide mortality data (38); medical records (31)], but they did not benefit from participant self-report to contextualize findings. Cautious interpretation of Chan et al. findings is warranted. While the study found significantly higher rates of suicide among crisis line callers, this is not necessarily an indication of lack of crisis line effectiveness. Rather, this study confirmed that crisis line callers are at increased risk for suicide, reinforcing the need for high quality wrap-around services and follow-up care to promote recovery and well-being. While reliability of outcome measurement has been shown in some approaches (e.g., silent monitoring, rating transcripts), further research is needed to establish validity in outcome ascertainment (e.g., measure SDV using standardized assessment tools). Promising approaches to outcome measurement have incorporated validated assessment tools, often modified for brevity (e.g., CCORS, MINI, POMS, BDI); however, more research is needed.
