BackgroundSuicidal ideation is increasing among university students. Despite growing demand for services, university counseling centers (UCCs) face limited resources to meet the complex needs of students who are suicidal. ObjectiveThe Comprehensive Adaptive Multisite Prevention of University Student Suicide (CAMPUS) Trial evaluates 4 treatment sequences within UCCs to develop evidence-based treatment guidelines. MethodsThe CAMPUS Trial consists of a feasibility study followed by a sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial (SMART). The original CAMPUS protocol was modified during the COVID-19 pandemic to accommodate new UCC tele–mental health services, including remote treatment, assessments, and monitoring. A smaller-scale feasibility study was conducted to (1) evaluate implementation of hybrid telehealth and in-person interventions and (2) fine-tune online procedures. Following the feasibility study, university students (aged 18-25 years) seeking UCC services with moderate to severe suicidal ideation will enroll in the CAMPUS Trial. Student participants are randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatment sequences with 2 stages of intervention. In stage 1, students receive 4 to 6 weeks of either (1) a suicide-focused treatment—Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality—or (2) enhanced treatment as usual. Treatment responders enter the maintenance phase. In stage 2, nonresponders are rerandomized for an additional 1 to 8 weeks of (1) Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality or (2) an intensive skills-based treatment—dialectical behavior therapy for UCC settings. UCC counselors will enroll in the CAMPUS Trial to complete measures about their experience working with students who are suicidal. CAMPUS Trial administration includes representation from all sites to facilitate cross-site coordination and an advisory board of stakeholders from all UCCs to facilitate treatment implementation. ResultsStudent participant recruitment began on October 25, 2022, and ended on May 16, 2024. As of November 2024, data collection for the SMART was ongoing with active study participants. Data collection was completed in November 2024, and as of April 2025, data analysis is underway. Full results will be available in 2025. ConclusionsThe CAMPUS Trial offers a model for future SMARTs for the treatment of suicidal thoughts or behaviors (or both) across various settings. The results will inform treatment guidelines for students presenting with suicidality at UCCs. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04707066; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04707066 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/68441

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the implementation of suicide-focused treatments delivered via a hybrid telemental health (TMH) and in-person format.MethodThis study was conducted at four university counseling centers (UCCs) across the United States. Treatment-seeking clients were recruited from their local UCCs and participated in adaptive treatment strategies (ATSs) involving Treatment as Usual (TAU), Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS), and Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT). Implementation outcomes, including appropriateness, acceptability, feasibility, fidelity, safety, and client satisfaction, were assessed. UCC clinicians participated in qualitative interviews focused on implementation of TMH for clients presenting with suicidal ideation (SI).ResultsOverall, treatments delivered via hybrid format were reported to be appropriate, acceptable, feasible, and satisfactory by clinicians and clients. Implementation of TMH was reported to be equivalent to in-person treatment across multiple measurement methods.ConclusionResults from this study demonstrate that TMH is an implementable treatment modality for addressing suicidality, particularly for college students presenting to UCCs with SI. This study has implications for real-world clinical settings planning to offer hybrid treatment modalities to address SI.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04728815.ConclusionResults from this study demonstrate that TMH is an implementable treatment modality for addressing suicidality, particularly for college students presenting to UCCs with SI. This study has implications for real-world clinical settings planning to offer hybrid treatment modalities to address SI.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04728815.

Can a practical process-oriented strategy prevent suicidal ideation and behavior?

ObjectiveHeavy alcohol use has been clearly linked to risk for suicidal behaviors and is also prevalent on many American college campuses. This report uses a large sample of college students to explore relationships between alcohol use, depressive symptoms, and suicidality. Methods: A brief suicide screen was completed by 40,335 university students at four pariticipating sites. Assessments quantified recent depressive symptoms, alcohol use, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts. Results: Problems from alcohol use were consistently associated with suicidal thoughts and attempts in the previous month, and in the previous year, but the quantity of alcohol used was not. Alcohol related problems exerted effects on the likelihood of both suicide ideation and attempts beyond those explained by their relationship with depressive symptoms. Conclusions: Screens for individuals at increased risk for suicidal ideation and behavior should emphasize alcohol-related problems over quantification of alcohol intake.

AIMS:There has been a marked increase in suicide fatalities among college-age students in recent years. Moreover, heavy alcohol use, a well-known risk factor for suicide, is present on most campuses. Yet, no prospective studies have examined alcohol use patterns among college students as predictors of suicidal behaviors.METHODS:Online of 40,335 students at four universities took place at the beginning of four academic years, 2015-2018. Of these, 2296 met criteria for an increased risk of suicidal behavior and completed 1- and/or 6-month follow-up evaluation(s). Baseline assessments included the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test to quantify alcohol consumption and resulting problems, and measures of depression, suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior.RESULTS:Suicide attempts during follow-up were reported by 35 (1.5%) of high-risk students. Regression analyses indicated that baseline severity of alcohol use consequences, but not amount of alcohol consumption, was associated with greater odds of a follow-up suicide attempt after controlling for baseline suicidal ideation, functional impairment and history of suicide attempts.CONCLUSIONS:Among college students at elevated risk for suicide, the severity of alcohol-related consequences was a significant predictor of future suicide attempts. Alcohol consumption was not a significant predictor, suggesting that the amount students drink is less of a concern for suicidal behavior than are the problems (e.g. failing to meet expectations, experiencing blackouts) associated with drinking.

Treatment fidelity is a crucial consideration within randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The present study relies on data from a feasibility RCT conducted with 62 treatment-seeking suicidal college students. Issues of experimental fidelity were germane in this investigation because the same clinicians provided both the experimental (the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality—CAMS) and the control (treatment as usual—TAU) care. The first aim of the current study was to determine adherence to the CAMS model within the experimental (CAMS) and control (TAU) treatment conditions. A second exploratory aim was included to examine how treatment fidelity impacted treatment outcomes (i.e., depression, suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and potential treatment moderators). The CAMS Rating Scale (CRS.3-R) was used to determine treatment adherence to the CAMS model and to ensure between-group fidelity within the trial. The CRS.3-R was completed throughout the course of care based on reviews of a selected number of video recordings of both CAMS and TAU sessions to measure treatment fidelity. Mean CRS.3-R scores revealed differences across treatment conditions such that clinicians were successfully able to provide each treatment separately without contamination. Further, higher CRS.3-R scores in CAMS sessions resulted in decreased hopelessness over the treatment period. Higher CRS.3-R scores in TAU sessions resulted in an increased likelihood of suicidal ideation and less reduction in hopelessness over the treatment period. Overall, clinicians can serve as their own controls in a RCT and levels of adherence to the CAMS model have different effects on suicidal ideation and hopelessness.

Los materiales y los temas de ACT en este libro se han tratado tanto en el contexto de la terapia individual como en el de las intervenciones de grupo, pero no se ha prestado una atención específica a las consideraciones especiales que surgen cuando ACT se administra en formato de grupo. Hay muchas razones para creer que la aplicación de ACT en un formato de grupo puede mejorar realmente su eficacia en ciertos aspectos y existe una literatura clínica en desarrollo que apoya esta suposición. No obstante, adaptar ACT al trabajo en grupo requiere prestar atención a diversos aspectos. Durante varios años, los autores han participado en el desarrollo y aplicación de grupos de ACT con diversos problemas clínicos y poblaciones de pacientes...

OBJECTIVE:Suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students in the United States, and the percentage of students reporting suicidal thoughts is increasing. Nevertheless, many students at risk do not seek mental health (MH) services. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) examined the efficacy of Electronic Bridge to Mental Health for College Students (eBridge) for increasing at-risk students' linkage to MH services. METHOD:Students from four universities were recruited via email; 40,347 (22.6%) completed the online suicide risk screen; and 3,363 (8.3%) met criteria for randomization based on suicide risk factors and lack of current treatment (62.2% female, 35.0% male, 2.8% transgender/nonbinary; 73.2% White, 7.0% Black, 19.9% Asian, 11.7% other; 12.4% Hispanic, 76.2% undergraduate). These students were randomized to eBridge [personalized feedback (PF) with option of online counseling] or Control (PF). The primary outcome was linkage to MH services within 6 months. RESULTS:Among students assigned to eBridge, 355 students (21.0%) posted ≥1 message, and 168 (10.0%) posted ≥2 messages to the counselor. In intent-to-treat analyses, there was no eBridge effect on obtaining MH services. However, within the eBridge group, students who posted ≥1 message were significantly more likely to link to MH services. CONCLUSIONS:eBridge shows promise for reaching a relatively small subset of college students at risk for suicide; however, engagement in eBridge was low. This study underscores the urgent need for more effective strategies to engage young adults in online mental health interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students, yet many students with elevated suicide risk do not seek professional help. This study identified suicide risk profiles among college students and examined these in relation to students' perceived barriers to professional help-seeking. Data were obtained from college students (n = 1689) identified to be at elevated risk for suicide based at four US universities. Latent class analysis was performed to determine risk profiles, followed by examinations of differences in help-seeking barriers by profile groupings. Results revealed three student groupings: (1) moderate internalizing and externalizing symptoms (with low alcohol misuse), (2) highest internalizing and externalizing symptoms (with highest social disconnection), and (3) lowest internalizing symptoms and low externalizing (with highest social connection and alcohol misuse). Group 1 included the youngest and most racially and sexually diverse students, Group 2 endorsed the most help-seeking barriers, and Group 3 endorsed the fewest barriers. Group 2 is especially concerning, considering the severe clinical characteristics, high number of barriers, and low connectedness to others for potential support. Understanding these differences across risk and barrier profiles is an important step towards developing tailored approaches to increase mental health care in college populations.

Objective To examine differences between Black students who do and do not screen positive for suicide risk; to describe barriers to mental health service utilization (MHSU) among participants with a positive screen and no current MHSU and; to determine if barriers vary by student characteristics. Participants: 1,559 Black students (66% female), ages 18 years and older (M = 21 years, SD = 2.61) recruited from September 2015 to October 2017 across four universities. Method: Participants completed an online survey assessing demographics, suicide risk, MHSU, and barriers to MHSU. Results: Seventeen percent of students screened positive for risk; 66% of these students were not receiving MHS. Students who screened positive were female and younger. Perceived problem severity (74%) was reported most frequently. Conclusions: Efforts to improve MHSU among Black college students at risk for suicide should address students' awareness of treatable MH problems and time concerns.

Depression and suicidal ideation have substantially increased among college students, yet many students with clinically significant symptoms do not perceive their distress as warranting mental health services. Personalized feedback (PF) interventions deliver objective data, often electronically, comparing an individual's reported symptoms or behaviors to a group norm. Several studies have shown promise for PF interventions in the context of mood and depression, yet little is known regarding how, and for whom, mood-focused PF interventions might be best deployed. The primary aim of this study was to examine the sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment-seeking factors associated with reviewing PF reports on emotional distress among college students (N = 1,673) screening positive for elevated suicide risk and not receiving mental health treatment. Results indicated that PF engagement was greatest among those with higher depression scores, and those reporting privacy/stigma concerns as barriers to treatment. Sexual minority students were more likely to review their PF than heterosexual students. Taken together, PF interventions may be a useful tool for engaging those with greater clinical acuity, and those hesitant to seek in-person care. Further research is warranted to examine the circumstances in which PF interventions might be used in isolation, or as part of a multitiered intervention strategy.

BACKGROUND:College student mental health (MH) problems and suicide risk have steadily increased over the past decade and a significant number of students with MH problems do not seek treatment. While some barriers to mental health care service utilization (MHSU) have been identified, very little is known regarding how these barriers differ among sociodemographic subgroups of students.METHOD:Participants were 3,358 college students from four US universities who screened positive for elevated suicide risk (defined as 2 or more of: depression, alcohol misuse, suicidal ideation, suicide attempt) and were not actively receiving MH services. Reported barriers to MHSU were categorized into: Low perceived need, privacy/stigma concerns, questioning helpfulness of treatment, logistics, time constraints, finances, and cultural issues.RESULTS:Adjusted odds ratios indicated that finances were a greater barrier for women, sexual and gender minority students, and Black and Hispanic students. Privacy/stigma concerns were more prominent for men and young undergraduate students. White students and older undergraduate and graduate students were more likely to report a lack of time, and cultural sensitivity issues were significant barriers for sexual and gender minority, and racial/ethnic minority, students.LIMITATIONS:Participating sites were not nationally representative. The barriers assessment did not examine the degree to which a specific barrier contributed to lack of MHSU relative to others.CONCLUSIONS:In light of the significant variation in barriers based on age, gender identity, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation, efforts to increase MHSU should be tailored to meet the unique needs of specific sociodemographic student subgroups.

This randomized controlled trial compared the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) and Treatment as Usual (TAU) for suicidal college students within a feasibility trial. Sixty-two suicidal college students were randomized to CAMS (n = 33) or TAU (n = 29). We hypothesized that those receiving CAMS would show more improvement in suicide-related measures, and effects would be moderated by borderline personality disorder (BPD), prior suicide attempts, and age. Both treatment groups showed improvements in all outcome variables; CAMS had a significantly higher impact on depression and suicidal ideation when measured weekly during care and was more likely than TAU to decrease hopelessness among students with fewer BPD features, no suicide attempt history, and older age. Conversely, TAU did better for students with BPD features and history of multiple suicide attempts.

OBJECTIVE:Sexual and gender minorities are at elevated risk for suicide, yet few studies have examined differences in risk within many sexual and gender minority subgroups. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in prevalence for suicide risk factors among a wide range of sexual orientations and gender identities.METHOD:Forty-one thousand four hundred and twelve college students (62% cis-female, 37% cis-male, 1% transgender/genderqueer) completed a wellness screen that included four suicide risk factors (depression, heavy alcohol use, suicide ideation, suicide attempt).RESULTS:Gender minority students (i.e., transgender, genderqueer/non-binary) had significantly higher rates of depression, suicide ideation, and suicide attempts relative to cisgender peers, although there were no within-group differences among gender minority students. Adjusted odds ratios for endorsing two or more (2+) suicide risk factors were substantially higher for all sexual minority subgroups relative to heterosexuals. Among sexual minorities, those identifying as pansexual, bisexual, queer, or mostly gay/lesbian had greater odds of endorsing 2+ suicide risk factors relative to students identifying as mostly heterosexual, gay/lesbian, asexual, or 'other sexual minority'. Pansexual students had 33% greater odds of endorsing 2+ suicide risk factors relative to bisexual students.CONCLUSIONS:These findings highlight significant variation in suicide risk among sexual minority subgroups and the need for targeted interventions for subgroups at highest risk.

BACKGROUND:Little is known about how victimization and discrimination relate to suicide risk among sexual and gender minority (SGM) college students, or what is protective for these students. The current study will: 1.) determine the extent to which interpersonal victimization, discrimination, identity affirmation, and social connectedness are associated with suicide risk characteristics, and if race and/or ethnicity moderates this association; 2.) examine whether identity affirmation and social connectedness are protective against associations between victimization or discrimination and suicide risk characteristics.METHOD:Participants were 868 students (63.6% female) from four United States universities who completed an online screening survey and met the following study inclusion criteria: self-identification as gender and/or sexual minority, endorsement of at least one suicide risk characteristic and no current use of mental health services. Participants also completed measures that assessed demographics, non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), victimization, discrimination, connectedness, and LGBTQ identity affirmation.RESULTS:Victimization was positively associated with depression severity, suicidal ideation, alcohol misuse, suicide attempt history, and NSSI. Discrimination was positively associated with depression severity, suicide attempt history, and NSSI. Connectedness was inversely associated with depression severity, suicidal ideation severity, suicide attempt history, and NSSI, and moderated the association between victimization and suicide attempt history. LGBTQ identity affirmation moderated the link between victimization and depression.CONCLUSIONS:Results suggest efforts to decrease victimization and discrimination and increase connectedness may decrease depressive morbidity and risks for self-harm among SGM college students. Further, increasing LGBTQ identity affirmation may buffer the impact of victimization on depression.

This study sought to develop and validate a domain-specific measure of psychological inflexibility for university students, the acceptance and action questionnaire for university students (AAQ-US). Generic versions of the AAQ tend to not be as sensitive to changes in campus-specific functioning —a key outcome of interest in this population. An online survey was conducted with 425 undergraduate students. Psychometric analyses led to the refinement of a 12-item, single factor scale with strong internal consistency. Evidence for convergent validity was found with moderate to large correlations between the AAQ-US and measures of academic outcomes, mental health, and psychological inflexibility. The AAQ-US was a stronger predictor of academic outcomes than the AAQ-II (a general measure of psychological inflexibility) whereas the AAQ-II was more strongly related to mental health outcomes than the AAQ-US. Incremental validity for the AAQ-US was found for predicting both academic and mental health outcomes while controlling for the AAQ-II, though effects were stronger for academic outcomes. Overall, results indicate that the AAQ-US is a reliable and valid measure of psychological inflexibility among university students and may be particularly relevant in the context of academic outcomes.

The current pilot study examined the acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy of a brief web-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention for the treatment of trauma-related psychological difficulties in interpersonal trauma survivors. Participants consisted of a community sample of adult women (N=25) who endorsed one or more forms of lifetime interpersonal victimization, including childhood sexual abuse, childhood physical abuse, adult sexual victimization, and intimate partner violence. All participants received the six-session web-based ACT program delivered over a period of six weeks and were assessed before and after the intervention. Significant improvements were found from pre- to post-treatment on primary outcome measures including symptoms of PTSD, depression, and anxiety. Increases in ACT knowledge and psychological flexibility were evidenced and psychological flexibility in turn was correlated with the primary outcome measures. Results provide preliminary support for the feasibility and usefulness of a web-based ACT approach for women survivors of interpersonal trauma.