Concordance Between the Ask Suicide Screening Questions (ASQ) and Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview-Self Report (SITBI-SR) Among Autistic and Non-Autistic Adults

Abstract

Objective

This study sought to examine concordance between two commonly used measures of suicidal thoughts and behaviors: the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) and the Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview—Self Report (SITBI-SR). Agreement was operationalized as the presence past month suicidal ideation and lifetime suicide attempts. To explore the utilization of these tools among neurodiverse samples, we also examined the concordance across autistic and non-autistic adults.

Methods

The sample consisted of 200 individuals recruited online. Half of the sample self-reported a diagnosis of autism. A series of Cohen’s kappas and confidence intervals were computed to assess agreement between the ASQ and SITBI-SR. Cohen’s kappa was computed separately for each set of comparisons for the autistic and non-autistic samples.

Results

Past month suicidal ideation had a kappa of 0.61 (95%CI = 0.48–0.73). The kappa for lifetime suicide attempts was 0.86 (95%CI = 0.78–0.94). There were no significant differences in agreement between the two measures for autistic versus non-autistic individuals.

Conclusions

Current findings suggest that the ASQ and SITBI-SR have high concordance with one another. Given that the ASQ and the SITBI-SR are both validated in the general population and that concordance was high and not significantly different based on autism status, the current study provides preliminary evidence that the ASQ and the SITBI-SR function similarly for autistic individuals.

HIGHLIGHTS

• People do not always respond consistently to different STB assessment methods.

• Findings suggest that the ASQ and SITBI-SR have high concordance with one another.

• Evidence provided that these measures function similarly for autistic individuals.

Keywords:

• Measurement
• neurodiversity
• suicidal ideation
• suicide attempts

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Annabelle M. Mournet

Annabelle Mournet, BA, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Vanessa Bal, PhD, Graduate School of Applied Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Evan Kleiman, PhD, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA.

Vanessa H. Bal

Annabelle Mournet, BA, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Vanessa Bal, PhD, Graduate School of Applied Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Evan Kleiman, PhD, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA.

Evan M. Kleiman

Annabelle Mournet, BA, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Vanessa Bal, PhD, Graduate School of Applied Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Evan Kleiman, PhD, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA.