Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 6, 2026

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Predicting suicidal behaviours using clinical instruments: systematic review and meta-analysis of positive predictive
Gregory Carter1, Allison Milner2, Katie McGill2
1Gregory Carter, MBBS, Cert Child Psych, PhD, FRANZCP, Centre for Brain and Mental Health Research, University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; Allison Milner, BJPsych (Hons), MEpi, PhD, Population Health Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, Burwood, and Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Katie McGill, MPsych (Clin), DClinPsych, Centre for Brain and Mental Health Research, University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; Jane Pirkis, MPsych, MAppEpid, PhD, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Nav Kapur, MBChB, MMedSci, MD, FRCPsych, Centre for Suicide Prevention, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, and Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Matthew J. Spittal, MBiostat, PhD, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia Gregory.carter@newcastle.edu.au.
Abstract:
BackgroundPrediction of suicidal behaviour is an aspirational goal for clinicians and policy makers; with patients classified as 'high risk' to be preferentially allocated treatment. Clinical usefulness requires an adequate positive predictive value (PPV).AimsTo identify studies of predictive instruments and to calculate PPV estimates for suicidal behaviours.MethodA systematic review identified studies of predictive instruments. A series of meta-analyses produced pooled estimates of PPV for suicidal behaviours.ResultsFor all scales combined, the pooled PPVs were: suicide 5.5% (95% CI 3.9-7.9%), self-harm 26.3% (95% CI 21.8-31.3%) and self-harm plus suicide 35.9% (95% CI 25.8-47.4%). Subanalyses on self-harm found pooled PPVs of 16.1% (95% CI 11.3-22.3%) for high-quality studies, 32.5% (95% CI 26.1-39.6%) for hospital-treated self-harm and 26.8% (95% CI 19.5-35.6%) for psychiatric in-patients.ConclusionsNo 'high-risk' classification was clinically useful. Prevalence imposes a ceiling on PPV. Treatment should reduce exposure to modifiable risk factors and offer effective interventions for selected subpopulations and unselected clinical populations.
Related Concept Videos
Self-Report Tests of Personality
Depressive Disorders: Etiology
Biological Factors in Depression
Biological predispositions significantly influence the risk of developing depressive disorders. Genetic studies highlight the role of variations in the serotonin transporter...
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)
Psychological and Sociocultural Causes of Schizophrenia
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...

