MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392870775 · doi:10.2196/56204

Suicide Prevention by Peers Offering Recovery Tactics (SUPPORT) for US Veterans With Serious Mental Illness: Community Engagement Approach

2024· article· en· W4392870775 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samantha A. Chalker, Jesus Serafez, Yuki Imai, Jeffrey Stinchcomb, Colin A. Depp, Elizabeth W. Twamley, Karen L. Fortuna, Marianne Goodman, Matthew Chinman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Participatory Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsMental illnessPsychologyCommunity engagementMental healthComputer securityPsychiatryPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Peer specialists are hired, trained, and accredited to share their lived experience of psychiatric illness to support other similar individuals through the recovery process. There are limited data on the role of peer specialists in suicide prevention, including their role in intervention development. OBJECTIVE: To better understand peer specialists within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), we followed partnership community engagement and a formative research approach to intervention development to (1) identify barriers, facilitators, and perceptions of VHA peer specialists delivering a suicide prevention service and (2) develop and refine an intervention curriculum based on an evidence-informed preliminary intervention framework for veterans with serious mental illness (SMI). METHODS: Following the community engagement approach, VHA local and national peer support and mental health leaders, veterans with SMI, and veteran peer specialists met to develop a preliminary intervention framework. Next, VHA peer specialist advisors (n=5) and scientific advisors (n=6) participated in respective advisory boards and met every 2-4 months for more than 18 months via videoconferencing to address study objectives. The process used was a reflexive thematic analysis after each advisory board meeting. RESULTS: The themes discussed included (1) the desire for suicide prevention training for peer specialists, (2) determining the role of VHA peer specialists in suicide prevention, (3) integration of recovery themes in suicide prevention, and (4) difficulties using safety plans during a crisis. There were no discrepancies in thematic content between advisory boards. Advisor input led to the development of Suicide Prevention by Peers Offering Recovery Tactics (SUPPORT). SUPPORT includes training in general suicide prevention and a peer specialist-delivered intervention for veterans with SMI at an increased suicide risk. This training aims to increase the competence and confidence of peer specialists in suicide prevention and the intervention supports veterans with SMI at an increased suicide risk through their recovery process. CONCLUSIONS: This paper intends to document the procedures taken in suicide prevention intervention development, specifically those led by peer specialists, and to be a source for future research developing and evaluating similar interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05537376; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05537376.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Participatory MedicineSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207