Affiliation:
1. Centre for Social and Early Emotional Development (SEED), School of Psychology, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
2. Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, VIC, Australia
3. Beyond Blue, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Abstract
Abstract: 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.