Suicide Risk

The proposed Center will leverage burgeoning real-time data linkage capabilities among health systems, Medicaid payors, and criminal legal (e.g., jail booking data, jail release data) systems, to identify individuals coming in and out of jail for suicide assessment and prevention, and to better coordinate care across these disparate systems. This Center will advance the fields of suicide prevention and criminal legal system-based mental health by solving a well-known, central problem in both fields: the inability to track and intervene with individuals moving in and out of both and often multiple systems. The goal is near-term reductions in the U.S. suicide rate.

This study examines a novel way to prevent suicide among Veterans with serious mental illness (SMI). It will assess the efficacy of PREVAIL-VA, a 3-month intervention of 12, one-on-one sessions between a Peer Specialist (PS) and a Veteran that involve semi-structured conversations focused on hope, belongingness, support, and safety. PSs are Veterans with SMI trained to use their own experience and recovery to help other Veterans with SMI. PSs have improved mental health outcomes in other research, but this study would be the first to test their efficacy for suicide prevention in VHA. The project will compare outcomes of Veterans at risk for suicide receiving usual care, to PREVAIL-VA. This work is responsive to national calls for Veterans with SMI to receive support that is evidence-based, improves recovery (not just symptoms), and is tailored to individual needs. If successful, PREVAIL-VA could be adopted by the 1400 Peer Specialists employed in VA, greatly increasing the delivery of evidence-based services to Veterans at risk for suicide.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if a structured expressive writing program can help reduce suicidal thoughts in adolescents and young adults who have experienced suicidal thoughts, suicide attempts, or self-harm. The study will include participants aged 13 to 24 years who are receiving mental health care or have recently been identified as being at risk for suicide. The main questions the study aims to answer are: * Does a structured expressive writing program lower suicidal thoughts compared with usual care alone? * Does the program improve depression, impulsivity, and self-esteem? Researchers will compare participants who receive the expressive writing program together with treatment as usual to participants who receive treatment as usual alone. Participants will: * Be randomly assigned to one of two groups: a writing program group or a usual care group * Complete questionnaires about mood, suicidal thoughts, and well-being at the start of the study, after 4 weeks, and after 8 weeks * If assigned to the writing program group, complete guided writing activities several times per week for 4 weeks. Each writing session will take about 15 to 20 minutes and will focus on understanding emotions, personal experiences, relationships, and meaning in difficult experiences. Researchers will study whether this writing program is a helpful and practical way to support young people who are experiencing suicidal thoughts or emotional distress.

The purpose of this study is to determine if adding a digital intervention to standard cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is more effective in preventing suicide risk and reducing eating disorder symptoms. Participants will be women between 18 and 65 years old who have recently experienced suicidal ideation or attempts. One group will receive standard group therapy, while the other will receive group therapy plus a mobile application and digital monitoring devices. The goal is to see if digital tools can improve clinical outcomes and safety for patients.

The study purpose is to test the effect of Crisis Response Planning (CRP) when used as the second method of suicide prevention in military service members who are at risk for suicide due to mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). CRP will be compared to usual treatment. The treatment will be a 30 to 60 minute session to one person at a time either in-person or using telehealth.

This doctoral project aims to develop a comprehensive theoretical model of the process through which the suicidal ideation framework is configured as a symbolic, narrative, and relational expression, adopting a multiperspective approach that spans the suicide attempt and the stages of care and recovery. Moving away from biomedical reductionisms, this investigation seeks to identify shared meaning-making nuclei and discursive fractures that reflect the inherent conflictuality of the suicidal act. Grounded in the integration of the theoretical frameworks previously outlined, this study adopts an interpretive-constructivist approach. Phase 1 will include studies conducted in OECD countries, providing a broad and conceptually diverse interpretive foundation. Phase 2, conducted in Catalonia, will deepen situated configurations, assuming that local sociocultural frameworks act as interpretive prisms for globally relevant phenomena. Overall, this theoretical-methodological architecture not only ensures conceptual robustness and coherence, but also articulates an ethical and epistemic commitment to understanding suicide through the complexity of its human textures. By centering suffering, listening to historically silenced voices, honoring the singularity of each life trajectory, and grounding the inquiry in an ethics of care, this study aims to transcend a merely technical-instrumental logic of knowledge.

Background: More than 12,000 people have taken part in research at the Experimental Therapeutics \& Pathophysiology Branch at the National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Program. This has led to advances in the treatment of depression, bipolar disorder, and suicide risk. Researchers want to follow up with this group to see if they continue to have mental health symptoms and receive psychiatric treatments. Objective: To learn the long-term impact of depression, bipolar disorder, and suicide risk. Eligibility: Adults ages 18 and older who signed consent for Protocol 01-M-0254 over a year ago. Design: This study has 2 phases: an online phase and a telephone phase. It has no in-person or face-to-face contact. In Phase 1, participants will fill out online surveys. They will access the surveys through the study website. The questions will focus on their current thoughts and feelings. The surveys will also ask about their current treatments for their mental health symptoms. At the end of the surveys, they will be asked if they would like to take part in Phase 2. If so, they will mark yes. Phase 2 includes a phone interview. They will be contacted by email to schedule the interview. In Phase 2, participants will be asked more in-depth questions about how they are feeling. They will also be asked which psychiatric medicines and treatments they have used since they left NIH. In both phases, participants can skip any questions they do not want to answer. The online surveys will take 30 minutes to complete. The phone interview will last 1-4 hours. The information that participants give in this study may be linked to their other NIH research records.

This study is testing a program called Get Better Together, a relationship education program designed to help military couples effectively navigate life stressors as a team. The goal is to find out if attending Get Better Together improves mental health and relationship skills, and reduces problems like alcohol misuse, aggression, and suicide risk. Couples who join the study will be randomly placed into one of two groups. One group will attend Get Better Together at a weekend retreat. The other group will continue their usual activities and later receive access to an online relationship education program. All participants will complete surveys before the retreat and again 2, 4, and 6 months later.

The goal of this proof-of-concept clinical trial is to evaluate the initial safety, feasibility, and tolerability of the orexin mixed antagonist suvorexant in a sample of veteran adults with Major Depressive Disorder and elevated suicide risk. The main question it aims to answer is: Is Suvorexant safe, feasible, and tolerable for participants? Participants will: * Take Surovexant every day for four weeks (10mg in the first two weeks and 20mg in the second two weeks) * Visit the medical center at the beginning of the study (week 1), after taking Suvorexant for two weeks (week 3) and following the full Suvorexant dose (week 5) for in-person assessments. * Fill out self-report assessments (remotely) at week 2 (after one week of Suvorexant) and week 4 (after three weeks of Surovexant)