MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414535482 · doi:10.2196/71344

Caring Text Messages for Suicide Prevention in Urban American Indian Youth: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4414535482 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erin R. Morgan, Marija Bogić, Luciana E. Hebert, Erin Poole, Nichole Tsosie, Nathania Tsosie, Marcia O’Leary, Raeann D. Mettler, Gina Johnson, Linda Son‐Stone, Tassy Parker, Dedra Buchwald, Spero M. Manson

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)Suicide preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: American Indian (AI) young adults in urban areas have many cultural strengths but also face unique challenges. Cultural norms within their communities strongly emphasize relationships. Previous research has found that receiving occasional positive and nondemanding messages-caring text messages-can be beneficial among people experiencing suicidality. OBJECTIVE: To ameliorate increasing rates of suicide and suicidality among AI young adults, we implemented a caring text message intervention designed to increase social connectedness. METHODS: This 2-arm, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial is being implemented at 2 clinical sites with large AI populations. Partnering with clinics in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Rapid City, South Dakota, we are recruiting AI adults aged 18-34 years to participate in a caring text message study. During the baseline visit, participants complete several surveys and an interview with study staff to understand their history of suicidal behavior. After completion of the baseline visit, participants are randomized to receive the intervention-approximately 30 caring text messages-or treatment as usual. The text messaging platform selected for this study allows bidirectional messaging; while there is no expectation that participants respond, they can provide feedback or seek additional resources. Participants are followed up at 6 and 12 months postbaseline. At the final 12-month follow-up visit, they complete many of the same surveys and participate in an interview to ascertain suicidality since their initial visit. The primary outcomes of interest are suicide-related behaviors-suicidal ideation, suicide planning, suicide attempt, or thoughts and actions requiring hospitalization. Secondary outcomes include social connectedness and other measures of mental health. We will use an intention-to-treat analysis with logistic and linear regression to calculate odds ratios and risk differences (95% CIs) for binary and continuous outcomes. RESULTS: As of June 2025, the New Mexico site has finished recruitment and follow-up assessments. The South Dakota site is still enrolling participants and has conducted the first follow-up assessments. The project has been well-received by participants. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial will evaluate whether a caring text message intervention is effective in reducing suicidality among AI young adults in urban areas. Participants have received the culturally tailored caring text messages. This trial will help establish whether caring text messages are an effective strategy for reducing suicidal behaviors and promoting feelings of connectedness among AI young adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03136094; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03136094. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/71344.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.010

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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies→French-language works237,207→