Perceived Usefulness of Self-Guided Versus Collaborative Suicide Safety Plans in Online Help-Seekers

Background: Suicide safety plans were originally devised to be paper-based and clinician-guided, but digital self-guided plans are now common. Aim: This study explored whether plan format (paper vs. digital), assistance (self-authored vs. collaboration), and suicide attempt history were associated with differences in suicidal ideation, suicide-related coping, and perceived usefulness. Method: An online sample of safety plan users (N = 131) completed a survey assessing suicidal ideation, suicide-related coping, and perceived usefulness of their plan. t tests compared outcomes by plan format, collaboration, and suicide attempt history. Pearson correlations explored associations between reasons for plan use, suicidal ideation, and suicide-related coping. Results: Suicidal ideation was significantly higher, and perceived usefulness significantly lower in participants with a past suicide attempt (vs. none) and in those who had collaborated to make their safety plan (vs. self-authored). Collaborators were largely health professionals. No significant differences were found between plan formats. Suicide-related coping was associated with higher perceived usefulness overall. Limitations: Our study design was cross-sectional, utilizing a largely young, female, English-speaking, online help-seeking sample. Conclusions: For clients with prior suicide attempts and higher levels of suicidal ideation, meaningful collaboration may be needed to find safety plan coping strategies that are perceived as useful.