The Military Women's Health Delphi Study: A Research Agenda for the Next Decade.

INTRODUCTION: As the burgeoning roles of women afford them the opportunities to perform in all combat and combat support assignments, the impact of all environmental, occupational, physical, and psychosocial factors inherent in military training and operations on their health must be considered. A robust foundation of knowledge is necessary to ascertain, prevent, and treat the potential impacts on women's health. However, a systematic review of the literature from 2000-2015 revealed widespread gaps in scientific knowledge of the musculoskeletal, psychological, occupational, and reproductive health of military women. The purpose of this study is to determine priorities for military women's health (MWH) research that will serve to fill these gaps in knowledge. METHODS: An advisory group of 11 senior military and women's health experts conducted a structured gap analysis of the results of a scoping review of literature from 2000 to 2015 and Military Health System utilization data to identify 15 topics for prioritization in MWH research. A modified e-Delphi study was conducted and consensus was achieved after two rounds. Participants (N = 32) included subject matter experts (SME) representing various professions enrolled, 23 completed both rounds. In round 1, topics were rated on forced Likert scales for relevance and feasibility to medical readiness and comments were elicited from the SMEs. Relevance and feasibility scores and themes from the comments guided the development of the round 2 survey, in which SMEs categorized the topics in terms of urgency and forced-choice ranked the priority of each topic. The quantitative data were analyzed using multilevel regression methods. Linear mixed models were fit separately on the numeric outcomes for feasibility, relevance, and urgency with research topic as the primary predictor. To analyze the rankings of research topic priority, crude and adjusted linear regression models were fit on the numeric outcome rank. RESULTS: The adjusted top five topics for research priorities as indicated by ranking were: genitourinary health, sleep, physical assault, behavioral health, and menstrual cycle research. The advisory group reviewed the findings in the context of Department of Defense strategic priorities and provided guidance on the design and dissemination of the MWH research agenda. CONCLUSIONS: The MWH research agenda is a validated research agenda of high-priority research topics that will promote enduring efforts to ensure evidence-based practices and health policies for military women through research.

Suicidal ideation is insensitive to suicide risk after emergency department discharge: Performance characteristics of the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale Screener.

OBJECTIVES: We describe the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)-Clinical Practice Screener's ability to predict suicide and emergency department (ED) visits for self-harm in the year following an ED encounter. METHODS: Screening data from adult patients' first ED encounter during a 27-month study period were analyzed. Patients were excluded if they died during the encounter or left without being identified. The outcomes were suicide as reported by the state health department and a recurrent ED visit for suicide attempt or self-harm reported by the state hospital association. Multivariable regression examined the screener's correlation with these outcomes. RESULTS: Among 92,643 patients analyzed, eleven (0.01%) patients died by suicide within a month after ED visit. The screener's sensitivity and specificity for suicide by 30 days were 0.18 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.00 to 0.41) and 0.99 (95% CI = 0.99 to 0.99). Sensitivity and specificity were better for predicting self-harm by 30 days: 0.53 (95% CI = 0.42 to 0.64) and 0.97 (95% CI = 0.97 to 0.97), respectively. Multivariable regression demonstrated that screening risk remained associated with both suicide and self-harm outcomes in the presence of covariates. Suicide risk was not mitigated by hospitalization or psychiatric intervention in the ED. CONCLUSIONS: The C-SSRS screener is insensitive to suicide risk after ED discharge. Most patients who died by suicide screened negative and did not receive psychiatric services in the ED. Moreover, most patients with suicidal ideation died by causes other than suicide. The screener was more sensitive for predicting nonfatal self-harm and may inform a comprehensive risk assessment. These results compel us to reimagine the provision of emergency psychiatric services.