Back

Defining Suicidal Thought and Behavior Phenotypes for Genetic Studies

Monson, E. T.; Colbert, S. M. C.; Andreassen, O. A.; Ayinde, O. O.; Bejan, C. A.; Ceja, Z.; Coon, H.; DiBlasi, E.; Izotova, A.; Kaufman, E. A.; Koromina, M.; Myung, W.; Nurnberger, J. I.; Serretti, A.; Smoller, J. W.; Stein, M.; Zai, C. C.; Suicide Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, ; Aslan, M.; Barr, P. B.; Bigdeli, T. B.; Harvey, P. D.; Kimbrel, N. A.; Patel, P. R.; Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) #572, ; Ruderfer, D. M.; Docherty, A. R.; Mullins, N.; Mann, J. J.

2024-07-29 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2024.07.27.24311110
Show abstract

BackgroundSuicidality, including suicidal ideation (SI), attempt (SA), and death (SD), represents complex and partially overlapping phenotypes. This complexity contributes to study population heterogeneity in suicidality research, impeding replication efforts and data consolidation by research consortia. The standardization of suicidality definitions would help but has been insufficiently addressed in existing literature. Here, the Suicide Workgroup of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) provides International Classification of Disease (ICD) definitions, a critical real-world data source, for SA and SI. MethodsThe PGC Suicide Workgroup used published definitions coupled with expert consensus to develop ICD lists to serve as suicidality phenotype definitions. One SI and two SA lists were produced and evaluated for performance against patient screening responses in two independent cohorts (N = 9,151 and 12,621) with differing ascertainment strategies. OutcomesICD list suicidality definitions were produced. Evaluation of generated ICD lists versus patient responses across two cohorts demonstrated varied sensitivity (15{middle dot}4% to 71{middle dot}1%), specificity (67{middle dot}6% to 96{middle dot}3%), and positive predictive values (0{middle dot}57-0{middle dot}92). SI ICD code performance also varied in sensitivity (29{middle dot}4%-86{middle dot}1%), specificity (64{middle dot}2% to 90{middle dot}6%), and positive predictive values (0{middle dot}67 to 0{middle dot}98). InterpretationGuidelines were developed to provide more consistent and comparable suicidality definitions. However, real-world application of ICD codes leads to a wide range of performance, dependent on cohort characteristics, that will need to be carefully considered in implementation. Future efforts would benefit from consistent training in use of ICD codes between sites to improve generalizability, and should include validation in diverse populations. FundingThis work was funded by NIMH R01MH132733 (Mullins), R01MH132733 (Ruderfer), R01MH123619 (Docherty), R01MH123489 (Coon), R01MH124839 (PGC4), R01MH118233 and MH117599 (Smoller), Brain and Behavior Research Foundation No. 31248 (Monson), the Huntsman Mental Health Institute, National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program Grant #1842169, and by grant # I01BX005881 and #IK6BX006523 (Kimbrel) from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Matching journals

1
Translational Psychiatry
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 94 published papers
Top 3%
14× avg
2
Psychological Medicine
Cambridge University Press (CUP) · based on 52 published papers
Top 1%
23× avg
3
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Elsevier BV · based on 22 published papers
#1
90× avg
4
Psychiatry Research
Elsevier BV · based on 33 published papers
Top 0.7%
32× avg
5
Biological Psychiatry
Elsevier BV · based on 36 published papers
Top 1%
27× avg
6
The British Journal of Psychiatry
Royal College of Psychiatrists · based on 21 published papers
Top 0.5%
38× avg
7
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Frontiers Media SA · based on 56 published papers
Top 2%
13× avg
8
Journal of Affective Disorders
Elsevier BV · based on 72 published papers
Top 3%
11× avg
9
Neuropsychopharmacology
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 29 published papers
Top 0.7%
36× avg
10
JAMA Psychiatry
American Medical Association (AMA) · based on 11 published papers
#1
69× avg
11
American Journal of Psychiatry
American Psychiatric Association Publishing · based on 14 published papers
Top 0.2%
52× avg
12
PLOS ONE
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 1737 published papers
Top 79%
2.9%
13
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 21 published papers
Top 0.9%
19× avg
14
American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics
Wiley · based on 15 published papers
Top 0.2%
58× avg
15
Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science
Elsevier BV · based on 23 published papers
Top 0.7%
29× avg
16
Molecular Psychiatry
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 84 published papers
Top 3%
10× avg
17
PLOS Medicine
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 95 published papers
Top 6%
4.3× avg
18
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
Elsevier BV · based on 27 published papers
Top 2%
20× avg
19
JAMA Network Open
American Medical Association (AMA) · based on 125 published papers
Top 10%
2.4× avg
20
Schizophrenia Research
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.7%
33× avg
21
BJPsych Open
Royal College of Psychiatrists · based on 24 published papers
Top 1%
17× avg
22
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
Cambridge University Press (CUP) · based on 10 published papers
Top 0.9%
22× avg
23
BMJ Mental Health
BMJ · based on 15 published papers
Top 1%
19× avg
24
BMC Psychiatry
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 20 published papers
Top 2%
9.4× avg
25
European Neuropsychopharmacology
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 2%
11× avg
26
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Wiley · based on 18 published papers
Top 2%
8.7× avg
27
BMJ Open
BMJ · based on 553 published papers
Top 54%
0.7%
28
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 14 published papers
Top 3%
7.5× avg