Accuracy of Clinician Predictions of Future Self-Harm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Predictive Studies

58Citations
Citations of this article
86Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Assessment of a patient after hospital-treated self-harm or psychiatric hospitalization often includes a risk assessment, resulting in a classification of high risk versus low risk for a future episode of self-harm. Through systematic review and a series of meta-analyses looking at unassisted clinician risk classification (eight studies; N = 22,499), we found pooled estimates for sensitivity 0.31 (95% CI: 0.18–0.50), specificity 0.85 (0.75–0.92), positive predictive value 0.22 (0.21–0.23), and negative predictive value 0.89 (0.86–0.92). Clinician classification was too inaccurate to be clinically useful. After-care should therefore be allocated on the basis of a needs rather than risk assessment.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Woodford, R., Spittal, M. J., Milner, A., McGill, K., Kapur, N., Pirkis, J., … Carter, G. (2019, February 1). Accuracy of Clinician Predictions of Future Self-Harm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Predictive Studies. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12395

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free