Risk Assessment and Management Self-Efficacy Scale

Delgadillo, Jaime; Moreea, Omar; Outhwaite-Luke, Hannah; Dace, Toby; Nicholls, Brenda; Ramseyer, Georgina; Dale, Veronica

doi:10.1037/t70532-000

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therapist confidence in suicide risk assessment formulation and management. The confidence in suicide risk assessment, formulation and safety planning scale was developed from an existing measure of practitioners' confidence in assessment and management of risk, the Risk Assessment and Management Self-Efficacy Scale, RAMSES (Delgadillo et al, 2014) with the authors' permission. The original scale has 18 items (rated 0-10) comprised of three subscales of Assessment (six items), Case Management (six items) and Intervention (six items).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One established method of evaluating risk training is to use the RAMSES scale designed to assess practitioners' levels of perceived confidence in risk assessment and management. The RAMSES is a widely used scale and has been shown to have high internal consistency, Cronbach's alpha = 0.96 (n = 110), and to display good construct validity (Delgadillo et al, 2014). It's psychometric properties have also been supported in further studies (Chongtham et al, 2015;Maina et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Adaptation of a Measure of Confidence in Assessing, Formulating, and Managing Suicide Risk

Sandford

Thwaites

Dagnan

et al. 2023

Crisis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Background: To date little has been done to evaluate the effectiveness of suicide risk formulation training. Aims: We aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of a new scale measuring clinicians' confidence in assessing, formulating, and managing suicide risk. Method: A total of 128 mental health practitioners from an UK National Health Service Trust completed the scale. Of them, 85 from an Improving Access to Psychological Therapies service did so before and after training in Risk Assessment, Formulation, and Management (RAFM); 28 practitioners from the Older Adults service also completed the measure. For test–retest analysis, a further 15 completed the scale again 1 week after baseline without attending any training. Of the training group, 52 (61%) completed the measure at the 6-month follow-up. Results: Analysis indicated a single-factor structure, good test–retest reliability, and statistically significant increases in confidence between pre- and posttraining and between pretraining and 6 month follow-up. Cohen's effect size values suggest a moderate-to-large effect. Limitations: The relatively small sample sizes indicate that this study should be considered a preliminary investigation of a new measure, which warrants further replication. Conclusion: This measure could be useful in gauging practitioners' confidence in the RAFM approach and in evaluating and developing training.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%