Structured Abstract

Contents

• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Technical Expert Panel
• Peer Reviewers
• Introduction
  • Scope of the Project
  • PICOTS
  • Analytic Framework
• Methods
  • Suicide Prevention Studies: Systematic Review
  • Data Systems
• Results
  • Suicide Prevention Studies
  • Data Systems
  • Key Question 1. What national, State, and community data systems can be linked to existing data from suicide prevention interventions in order to add possible value for stakeholders, and what methods are available to link the data systems?
  • Key Question 2. Which statistical methods are reliable and valid for analyzing linked national, State, and community data systems and suicide prevention data to avoid misleading conclusions?
  • Key Question 3. Which statistical methods are reliable and valid for understanding possible moderators in suicide prevention programs to improve targeting interventions to populations?
• Discussion
  • Key Findings
  • Findings in Relationship to What Is Already Known
  • Limitations of the Systematic Review Process
  • Limitations of the Data Systems
  • Future Research Needs and Opportunities
  • Conclusions
• References
• Appendix A. Acronyms
• Appendix B. Search Strategies
• Appendix C. Environmental Scan Coding Scheme
• Appendix D. Results of the Literature Search
• Appendix E. Evidence Tables
• Appendix F. Included Data Systems

Suggested citation:

Wilcox HC, Wissow L, Kharrazi H, Wilson RF, Musci RJ, Zhang A, Robinson KA. Data Linkage Strategies To Advance Youth Suicide Prevention. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 222. (Prepared by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2012-00007-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 16(17)-E001-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; September 2016. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCERTA222.

This report is based on research conducted by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2012-00007-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.

AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.

This report may periodically be assessed for the currency of conclusions. If an assessment is done, the resulting surveillance report describing the methodology and findings will be found on the Effective Health Care Program Web site at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov. Search on the title of the report.

1

5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; www​.ahrq.gov