SuicideSOSNCT03104504
A System of Safety (SOS)
A study testing Suicide Risk Screening, Safety Planning and Care transition facilitation in people with Suicide, run by University of Massachusetts, Worcester at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
SOS will identify evidence based best practices consistent with Zero Suicide's six specific recommended clinical actions (A.2.) and use them to develop standardized clinical protocols for each care setting, clinical unit, population serviced, and clinical discipline. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 12 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Suicide
- What is being tested?
- Suicide Risk Screening, Safety Planning and Care transition facilitation
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 493,756 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2016to 31 Dec 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 12 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- • Patients >12 years old
Who cannot join
- • Patients <12 years old
- Adults unable to consent
- Prisoners
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
UMass Memorial Health Care
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01655
About this study
Official title: A System of Safety: Preventing Suicided Through Healthcare System Transformation
SOS will identify evidence based best practices consistent with Zero Suicide's six specific recommended clinical actions (A.2.) and use them to develop standardized clinical protocols for each care setting, clinical unit, population serviced, and clinical discipline. Using Lean CQI, the investigators will tailor, implement, and improve adherence to these protocols. To support feasibility, SOS will use a phased roll out and a hub-and-spoke design. The intervention targets will be suicide-related clinician behaviors. The investigators will aspire to adopt best practices and measure all six recommended performance elements; however, for feasibility, the research evaluation will focus on suicide risk screening, safety planning, means restriction counseling, and post-acute care follow-up calls. The primary patient outcomes will be suicide risk identification, suicide, suicide attempts, and suicide-related emergencies requiring acute care. The investigators will examine potential mechanisms of action and moderators, and conduct a cost effectiveness analysis of SOS versus usual care. The investigators will employ a stepped wedge design and follow individuals for 6 to 54 months. Outcomes, clinician behaviors, and other variables will be gathered through: (1) EHR data extraction, (2) claims data from UMMHC and the MA All Payer Claims Database, (3) random medical chart abstractions, (4) MA state vital statistics and National Death Index (NDI), (5) clinician surveys, (6) Lean evaluations and process observations, and (7) patient fidelity interviews. Data will be analyzed using generalized linear mixed models.
Read the detailed description
The System of Safety (SOS) project will catalyze and expand the investigators existing efforts to transform suicide risk detection and suicide prevention across the UMass Memorial HealthCare system (UMMHC), the largest healthcare system in central Massachusetts representing a catchment area of 1.06 million people. This effort will span emergency department, inpatient, and primary care settings; engage medical and behavioral health clinicians; target adults and children; and support integration and collaboration across the entire system to provide a 360-degree safety net for patients at risk for suicide. Building on our previous and ongoing work, Zero Suicide's Seven Essential Elements of Care (Essential Elements) will be the foundation for an innovative continuous performance improvement (CQI) hub-and-spoke model whereby a central System Hub will work with Local Hubs and Spokes representing each setting and clinical unit. SOS will evolve over three phases. Phase 1 (months 1 - 12) will start with the emergency departments across the four UMMHC hospitals; Phase 2 (months 13 - 30) will extend the efforts to the inpatient medical and psychiatric units; and, Phase 3 (months 31 - 48) will expand to primary care settings. Overall, 39 clinical units will be engaged.
Consistent with central CQI tenets and the Zero Suicide model, the investigators will create protocols using best-practice approaches to identifying, assessing, managing, and intervening with suicidal patients while tailoring the approach to the particular clinical unit's unique needs and population. Units will learn from one another through regular collaborative work sessions, retreats, and cross departmental sentinel case reviews of suicides and suicide attempts. Fidelity to key components of the protocols will be measured.
The investigators will use a stepped wedge design with cluster randomization of clinical units, stratified by setting. Within each setting (Phase), the study population will consist of all patients seen in any of the clinical units during the pre-specified observation period before (Control) or after (Intervention) the unit's implementation start date. The investigators will follow these estimated 310,000 patients from their 1st encounter with a clinical unit through 6 months after Phase 3 ends (month 54). The investigators Aims assess the effect of SOS on its intervention targets (clinician behaviors) and on patient outcomes, using a system-level analytic strategy. The Specific Aims are:
Aim 1: Examine the impact of the SOS intervention on clinician-administered, standardized suicide risk screening and suicide risk identification across settings and clinical units.
H1: Likelihood of clinician-administered standardized suicide risk screening (an intervention target) at the time when a patient enters the study will increase monotonically with time since study initiation.
H2: Likelihood of suicide risk identification (patient outcome) at the time when a patient enters the study will increase monotonically with time since study initiation.
H3: The increasing likelihoods of screening and identification are attributable to SOS implementation.
Aim 2: Examine the impact of SOS on suicide related outcomes across settings and clinical units.
H4: As SOS is implemented across more settings and clinical units, the likelihood of receiving a best practice suicide prevention intervention by a clinician (intervention target) will increase among newly identified at-risk patients. This includes, but is not limited to, collaborative safety planning, means restriction counseling, and a post-acute care follow-up telephone call within 24 hours of discharge.
H5: SOS implementation will decrease the likelihood of suicide, suicide attempt, or suicide-related emergency requiring acute medical attention (patient outcomes) among newly identified at-risk patients.
H6: "Dose" of exposure to SOS will mediate the effect of SOS noted in H5.
Exploratory Aims: The investigators will also evaluate SOS from different perspectives by:
A: Exploring potential moderating and mediating factors, and potential mechanisms of action, such as:
EH1: Supportive organizational characteristics (e.g., embedded behavioral services on site, providing regular clinician-level performance feedback) will promote higher adherence to SOS implementation.
B: Exploring the population level effect of SOS on a subgroup of UMMHC patients that constitutes an Accountable Care Organization (ACO). For example, the investigators hypothesize that:
EH2: Suicide-related outcomes measured at the entire ACO population level (not just those encountering a clinical unit during the study period) will decrease monotonically during the study period (3-month increments).
C: Exploring the cost-effectiveness of the SOS intervention compared to usual care. The investigators hypothesize that EH3: The cost of SOS will be < $50,000/ quality-adjusted life year saved, a commonly used threshold.
- Conditions
- Suicide
- Being tested
- Suicide Risk Screening, Safety Planning, Care transition facilitation, A Lean Implementation Strategy
- Keywords
- Suicide Screening, Safety Planning
- Medical subject headings
- Suicide
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Suicide Risk ScreeningBehavioural
Suicide risk screening will be implemented as the standard of care for all patients who present for treatment.
Safety PlanningBehavioural
Suicide screen-positive patients who are to be discharged from the hospital will receive personalized safety planning by a mental health clinician or nurse that includes means restriction counseling as a step in the safety plan.
Care transition facilitationBehavioural
Include post-acute telephone phone call follow-up to foster engagement with outpatient care and problem solving within 24 hours of discharge
A Lean Implementation StrategyBehavioural
The Interventions will be implemented using Lean performance improvement strategies
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| No Intervention | No intervention | Baseline Retrospective Chart Reviews that are conducted on subjects for the one year period prior to the implementation of the study will serve as the control. |
| Intervention | Other | The intervention targets will be the following suicide-related clinician behaviors.
* suicide risk screening
* safety planning
* means restriction counseling
* Post-acute care follow-up calls A Lean Implementation Strategy: The Implementation of the intervention targets guided by Lean; is expected to increase suicide-related clinician behaviors Receives: Behavioral: Suicide Risk Screening; Behavioral: Safety Planning; Behavioral: Care transition facilitation; Behavioral: A Lean Implementation Strategy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Standardized suicide risk screening
A completed suicide screen will be defined as any chart documentation of the presence OR absence of suicidal ideation AND presence or absence of a past suicide attempt (0=None documented, 1=Partial (+/- ideation OR attempt noted), 2=Complete (+/- ideation AND attempt noted).
Measured: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Safety planning
A safety plan will be defined as a written document collaboratively developed with the patient identifying steps to take when feeling suicidal. We will code it as 0=None, no documentation of a safety plan, 1=Partial (e.g., some steps but not all completed), or 2=Complete (all six steps completed).
Measured: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Means restriction counseling
a step in the Safety Plan Intervention includes means restriction counseling. We will code it as 0=None, no documentation of means restriction counseling, 1=Complete, documentation of means restriction counseling.
Measured: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Care transition facilitation
Include post-acute telephone phone call follow-up to foster engagement with outpatient care and problem solving within 24 hours of discharge (0 = Not completed, 1 = Completed).
Measured: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Suicide risk identification
A positive screen (i.e., identification) will be defined as patient endorsement of active ideation OR report of a lifetime suicide attempt. We will also examine ICD-10 codes assigned to each visit within claims data.
Measured: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Suicide outcomes
Suicide will be ascertained through MA vital statistics review with the DPH Suicide Prevention Program. We will match definite and suspected suicides against the study population. Suicide attempt will be defined as an ED visit or a hospitalization with: an ICD-10 code (i.e., intentional self-injury) OR Positive suicide attempt on an encounter day per the EHR templated screener. Suicide-related acute healthcare encounter will be defined as a suicide attempt (same criteria as above) OR a ICD-10 code (i.e., suicidal ideation) OR positive screen for suicidal ideation per the EHR templated screener
Measured: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Apr 2017
- Study start1 Oct 2016
- Primary completion31 Dec 2023
- Study completion31 Dec 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for SuicideStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Massachusetts, WorcesterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Model description
- Stepped Wedge Design
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 493,756 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Massachusetts, Worcester
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Edwin Boudreaux, University of Massachusetts, Worcester
- Investigators
- Edwin D Boudreaux, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Massachusetts, WorcesterCatarina Kiefe, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Massachusetts, Worcester
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03104504
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- H00011407
- Other IDs
- 1R01MH112138-01
- Acronym
- SOS
- Status last verified
- Mar 2024
- First submitted
- 3 Apr 2017
- Last updated
- 12 Mar 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: A de-identified database from this study, along with associated database documentation (see below), will be made available online three years after the dataset is closed, without cost to researchers and analysts. NIMH will host the dataset on the NIMH Limited Access Dataset website; access and use will be governed by its policies, which can be found at: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/trials/datasets/nimh-policy-for-distribution-of-data.shtml.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Mar 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A System of Safety: Preventing Suicided Through Healthcare System Transformation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03104504
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SOS / H00011407
- Conditions
- Suicide
- Keywords
- Suicide Screening, Safety Planning
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 493,756 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Massachusetts, WorcesterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 7 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
SOS will identify evidence based best practices consistent with Zero Suicide's six specific recommended clinical actions (A.2.) and use them to develop standardized clinical protocols for each care setting, clinical unit, population serviced, and clinical discipline. Using Lean CQI, the investigators will tailor, implement, and improve adherence to these protocols. To support feasibility, SOS will use a phased roll out and a hub-and-spoke design. The intervention targets will be suicide-related clinician behaviors. The investigators will aspire to adopt best practices and measure all six recommended performance elements; however, for feasibility, the research evaluation will focus on suicide risk screening, safety planning, means restriction counseling, and post-acute care follow-up calls. The primary patient outcomes will be suicide risk identification, suicide, suicide attempts, and suicide-related emergencies requiring acute care. The investigators will examine potential mechanisms of action and moderators, and conduct a cost effectiveness analysis of SOS versus usual care. The investigators will employ a stepped wedge design and follow individuals for 6 to 54 months. Outcomes, clinician behaviors, and other variables will be gathered through: (1) EHR data extraction, (2) claims data from UMMHC and the MA All Payer Claims Database, (3) random medical chart abstractions, (4) MA state vital statistics and National Death Index (NDI), (5) clinician surveys, (6) Lean evaluations and process observations, and (7) patient fidelity interviews. Data will be analyzed using generalized linear mixed models.
Detailed description
The System of Safety (SOS) project will catalyze and expand the investigators existing efforts to transform suicide risk detection and suicide prevention across the UMass Memorial HealthCare system (UMMHC), the largest healthcare system in central Massachusetts representing a catchment area of 1.06 million people. This effort will span emergency department, inpatient, and primary care settings; engage medical and behavioral health clinicians; target adults and children; and support integration and collaboration across the entire system to provide a 360-degree safety net for patients at risk for suicide. Building on our previous and ongoing work, Zero Suicide's Seven Essential Elements of Care (Essential Elements) will be the foundation for an innovative continuous performance improvement (CQI) hub-and-spoke model whereby a central System Hub will work with Local Hubs and Spokes representing each setting and clinical unit. SOS will evolve over three phases. Phase 1 (months 1 - 12) will start with the emergency departments across the four UMMHC hospitals; Phase 2 (months 13 - 30) will extend the efforts to the inpatient medical and psychiatric units; and, Phase 3 (months 31 - 48) will expand to primary care settings. Overall, 39 clinical units will be engaged.
Consistent with central CQI tenets and the Zero Suicide model, the investigators will create protocols using best-practice approaches to identifying, assessing, managing, and intervening with suicidal patients while tailoring the approach to the particular clinical unit's unique needs and population. Units will learn from one another through regular collaborative work sessions, retreats, and cross departmental sentinel case reviews of suicides and suicide attempts. Fidelity to key components of the protocols will be measured.
The investigators will use a stepped wedge design with cluster randomization of clinical units, stratified by setting. Within each setting (Phase), the study population will consist of all patients seen in any of the clinical units during the pre-specified observation period before (Control) or after (Intervention) the unit's implementation start date. The investigators will follow these estimated 310,000 patients from their 1st encounter with a clinical unit through 6 months after Phase 3 ends (month 54). The investigators Aims assess the effect of SOS on its intervention targets (clinician behaviors) and on patient outcomes, using a system-level analytic strategy. The Specific Aims are:
Aim 1: Examine the impact of the SOS intervention on clinician-administered, standardized suicide risk screening and suicide risk identification across settings and clinical units.
H1: Likelihood of clinician-administered standardized suicide risk screening (an intervention target) at the time when a patient enters the study will increase monotonically with time since study initiation.
H2: Likelihood of suicide risk identification (patient outcome) at the time when a patient enters the study will increase monotonically with time since study initiation.
H3: The increasing likelihoods of screening and identification are attributable to SOS implementation.
Aim 2: Examine the impact of SOS on suicide related outcomes across settings and clinical units.
H4: As SOS is implemented across more settings and clinical units, the likelihood of receiving a best practice suicide prevention intervention by a clinician (intervention target) will increase among newly identified at-risk patients. This includes, but is not limited to, collaborative safety planning, means restriction counseling, and a post-acute care follow-up telephone call within 24 hours of discharge.
H5: SOS implementation will decrease the likelihood of suicide, suicide attempt, or suicide-related emergency requiring acute medical attention (patient outcomes) among newly identified at-risk patients.
H6: "Dose" of exposure to SOS will mediate the effect of SOS noted in H5.
Exploratory Aims: The investigators will also evaluate SOS from different perspectives by:
A: Exploring potential moderating and mediating factors, and potential mechanisms of action, such as:
EH1: Supportive organizational characteristics (e.g., embedded behavioral services on site, providing regular clinician-level performance feedback) will promote higher adherence to SOS implementation.
B: Exploring the population level effect of SOS on a subgroup of UMMHC patients that constitutes an Accountable Care Organization (ACO). For example, the investigators hypothesize that:
EH2: Suicide-related outcomes measured at the entire ACO population level (not just those encountering a clinical unit during the study period) will decrease monotonically during the study period (3-month increments).
C: Exploring the cost-effectiveness of the SOS intervention compared to usual care. The investigators hypothesize that EH3: The cost of SOS will be < $50,000/ quality-adjusted life year saved, a commonly used threshold.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Stepped Wedge Design
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| No Intervention | No intervention | –Baseline Retrospective Chart Reviews that are conducted on subjects for the one year period prior to the implementation of the study will serve as the control. |
| Intervention | Other | Behavioral: Suicide Risk Screening, Behavioral: Safety Planning, Behavioral: Care transition facilitation, Behavioral: A Lean Implementation StrategyThe intervention targets will be the following suicide-related clinician behaviors. * suicide risk screening * safety planning * means restriction counseling * Post-acute care follow-up calls A Lean Implementation Strategy: The Implementation of the intervention targets guided by Lean; is expected to increase suicide-related clinician behaviors |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 12 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- • Patients >12 years old
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- • Patients <12 years old
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Suicide Risk ScreeningSuicide risk screening will be implemented as the standard of care for all patients who present for treatment. | Behavioural | Intervention |
| Safety PlanningSuicide screen-positive patients who are to be discharged from the hospital will receive personalized safety planning by a mental health clinician or nurse that includes means restriction counseling as a step in the safety plan. | Behavioural | Intervention |
| Care transition facilitationInclude post-acute telephone phone call follow-up to foster engagement with outpatient care and problem solving within 24 hours of discharge | Behavioural | Intervention |
| A Lean Implementation StrategyThe Interventions will be implemented using Lean performance improvement strategies | Behavioural | Intervention |
Primary outcome
Standardized suicide risk screening
Time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
A completed suicide screen will be defined as any chart documentation of the presence OR absence of suicidal ideation AND presence or absence of a past suicide attempt (0=None documented, 1=Partial (+/- ideation OR attempt noted), 2=Complete (+/- ideation AND attempt noted).
Safety planning
Time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
A safety plan will be defined as a written document collaboratively developed with the patient identifying steps to take when feeling suicidal. We will code it as 0=None, no documentation of a safety plan, 1=Partial (e.g., some steps but not all completed), or 2=Complete (all six steps completed).
Means restriction counseling
Time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
a step in the Safety Plan Intervention includes means restriction counseling. We will code it as 0=None, no documentation of means restriction counseling, 1=Complete, documentation of means restriction counseling.
Care transition facilitation
Time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Include post-acute telephone phone call follow-up to foster engagement with outpatient care and problem solving within 24 hours of discharge (0 = Not completed, 1 = Completed).
Suicide risk identification
Time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
A positive screen (i.e., identification) will be defined as patient endorsement of active ideation OR report of a lifetime suicide attempt. We will also examine ICD-10 codes assigned to each visit within claims data.
Suicide outcomes
Time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit
Suicide will be ascertained through MA vital statistics review with the DPH Suicide Prevention Program. We will match definite and suspected suicides against the study population. Suicide attempt will be defined as an ED visit or a hospitalization with: an ICD-10 code (i.e., intentional self-injury) OR Positive suicide attempt on an encounter day per the EHR templated screener. Suicide-related acute healthcare encounter will be defined as a suicide attempt (same criteria as above) OR a ICD-10 code (i.e., suicidal ideation) OR positive screen for suicidal ideation per the EHR templated screener
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 Mar 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. A de-identified database from this study, along with associated database documentation (see below), will be made available online three years after the dataset is closed, without cost to researchers and analysts. NIMH will host the dataset on the NIMH Limited Access Dataset website; access and use will be governed by its policies, which can be found at: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/trials/datasets/nimh-policy-for-distribution-of-data.shtml.
Related trials for Suicide
Not yet recruiting
A Pre-post Study of a Lethal Means Safety Planning Intervention for Youth at Elevated Suicide Risk in the Emergency Department.
Suicidal Ideas, Suicidal Ideation
Recruiting
Preventing Suicidal Behavior With Diverse High-Risk Youth in Acute Care Settings
Suicide, Attempted, Suicide Ideation
Not yet recruiting
Deaf CBT-TS to Reduce Suicide Risk
Depression - Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety
Recruiting
Exploring The Effect of TikTok Trigger Warnings in a Clinical Sample of Youth at Risk of Suicide
Suicide Prevention, Social Media Users
Active, not recruiting
Parent Intervention for Psychiatrically-Hospitalized Youth
Adolescent - Emotional Problem, Suicide and Self-harm
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Edwin D Boudreaux, PhD principal investigator
University of Massachusetts, Worcester
Catarina Kiefe, MD, PhD principal investigator
University of Massachusetts, Worcester
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Suicide Risk Screening, Safety Planning and Care transition facilitation in people with Suicide, run by University of Massachusetts, Worcester at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 Mar 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Standardized suicide risk screening (time frame: 6 months after the Index ED Visit). The study lists 6 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 12 Mar 2024.