Longitudinal trial evaluates C-SSRS scoring validity in Brazilian young adults, indicating caution in interpretation.
INTRODUCTION: The Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) is widely used for assessing suicidal thoughts and behaviors, yet evidence on the validity of its scoring outputs in community-based samples from low- and middle-income countries remains scarce. METHODS: Participants included 2076 young adults (mean age 23.45, 47% female) from the Brazilian High-Risk Cohort Study at 15-year follow-up. We evaluated C-SSRS Ideation Severity (0-5) and Intensity (0-25) scores using internal consistency, confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory, Guttman scalability, convergent/discriminant validity, known-groups comparisons, ROC analysis, and longitudinal associations with childhood risk factors via adjusted count regression. RESULTS: 37% endorsed lifetime suicidal ideation; 16% reported attempts. Internal consistency was low for severity (KR-20 = 0.57) and intensity (ω = 0.67). A two-factor model improved fit over a unidimensional structure (CFI = 0.997 vs. 0.954). Guttman scalability was acceptable (CR = 0.940) but with violations at higher severity levels. C-SSRS severity discriminated attempt history (AUC = 0.93). Prior self-harm was the strongest longitudinal predictor (IRR = 2.06), with a dose-response across risk categories. CONCLUSION: C-SSRS scores show low internal consistency and multidimensional structure, yet strong clinical discrimination and robust 15-year longitudinal associations. Caution is warranted when using these scores as continuous indices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Damiano et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: