Outcome
Type |
Measure |
Description |
Time frame |
Safety issue |
Primary |
Engagement in Firearm Safety Behaviors |
This includes a variety of actions and thinking patterns that promote safety regarding firearms. This is measured by a self-report instrument (Engagement in Firearm Safety Behaviors; Stanley, 2018), which contains 34 items. The items are scored on a Likert scale (i.e., 0 = Never; 1 = Sometimes, 2 = Often, 3 = Always) to gauge frequency of engagement. 16 items represent behaviors (e.g., "using a gun lock," "trading in your guns") and 18 represent thoughts (e.g., "thought about obtaining a gun lock," "thought about storing your gun unloaded.") |
Immediately prior to intervention |
|
Primary |
Engagement in Firearm Safety Behaviors |
This includes a variety of actions and thinking patterns that promote safety regarding firearms. This is measured by a self-report instrument (Engagement in Firearm Safety Behaviors; Stanley, 2018), which contains 34 items. The items are scored on a Likert scale (i.e., 0 = Never; 1 = Sometimes, 2 = Often, 3 = Always) to gauge frequency of engagement. 16 items represent behaviors (e.g., "using a gun lock," "trading in your guns") and 18 represent thoughts (e.g., "thought about obtaining a gun lock," "thought about storing your gun unloaded.") |
Two weeks after intervention |
|
Primary |
Engagement in Firearm Safety Behaviors |
This includes a variety of actions and thinking patterns that promote safety regarding firearms. This is measured by a self-report instrument (Engagement in Firearm Safety Behaviors; Stanley, 2018), which contains 34 items. The items are scored on a Likert scale (i.e., 0 = Never; 1 = Sometimes, 2 = Often, 3 = Always) to gauge frequency of engagement. 16 items represent behaviors (e.g., "using a gun lock," "trading in your guns") and 18 represent thoughts (e.g., "thought about obtaining a gun lock," "thought about storing your gun unloaded.") |
One month after intervention |
|
Secondary |
Intentions to Adhere to Clinician Recommendations |
A structured self-report questionnaire utilized in previous research (Stanley et al., 2017; Stanley, 2018) will be used in the present study to assess participants' intentions to adhere to clinician recommendations to limit access to a firearm for safety purposes. The two items will be rated on a 10-point Likert type scale (1 = Not At All Likely; 10 = Very Likely) and they will read as follows: 1) "How likely would you be to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit your access to a firearm for safety purposes?"; and 2) "How likely would you be to encourage a loved one to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit their access to a firearm for safety purposes?" |
Immediately prior to Intervention |
|
Secondary |
Intentions to Adhere to Clinician Recommendations |
A structured self-report questionnaire utilized in previous research (Stanley et al., 2017; Stanley, 2018) will be used in the present study to assess participants' intentions to adhere to clinician recommendations to limit access to a firearm for safety purposes. The two items will be rated on a 10-point Likert type scale (1 = Not At All Likely; 10 = Very Likely) and they will read as follows: 1) "How likely would you be to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit your access to a firearm for safety purposes?"; and 2) "How likely would you be to encourage a loved one to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit their access to a firearm for safety purposes?" |
Immediately after intervention |
|
Secondary |
Intentions to Adhere to Clinician Recommendations |
A structured self-report questionnaire utilized in previous research (Stanley et al., 2017; Stanley, 2018) will be used in the present study to assess participants' intentions to adhere to clinician recommendations to limit access to a firearm for safety purposes. The two items will be rated on a 10-point Likert type scale (1 = Not At All Likely; 10 = Very Likely) and they will read as follows: 1) "How likely would you be to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit your access to a firearm for safety purposes?"; and 2) "How likely would you be to encourage a loved one to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit their access to a firearm for safety purposes?" |
Two weeks after intervention |
|
Secondary |
Intentions to Adhere to Clinician Recommendations |
A structured self-report questionnaire utilized in previous research (Stanley et al., 2017; Stanley, 2018) will be used in the present study to assess participants' intentions to adhere to clinician recommendations to limit access to a firearm for safety purposes. The two items will be rated on a 10-point Likert type scale (1 = Not At All Likely; 10 = Very Likely) and they will read as follows: 1) "How likely would you be to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit your access to a firearm for safety purposes?"; and 2) "How likely would you be to encourage a loved one to adhere to your clinician's recommendations to limit their access to a firearm for safety purposes?" |
One month after intervention |
|
Secondary |
Acceptability of Intervention |
The acceptability of the intervention will be measured utilizing the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8). The CSQ-8 is an 8-item instrument assessing the degree to which individuals find services to be acceptable (Attkisson & Zwick, 1982; Larsen et al., 1979). Items are rated in Likert type scales ranging from 1 to 4 (e.g., 1 = Quite dissatisfied, 2 = indifferent or mildly dissatisfied, 3 = Mostly satisfied, 4 = Very satisfied). The measure utilizes a summed score (range: 8-32), with higher values being indicative of higher levels of acceptability for the services received by respondents. Items cover a broad array of acceptability standards (e.g., "How satisfied are you with the amount of help you received?", "Have the services you received helped you to deal more effectively with your problems?"). |
Immediately prior to intervention |
|
Secondary |
Acceptability of Intervention |
The acceptability of the intervention will be measured utilizing the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8). The CSQ-8 is an 8-item instrument assessing the degree to which individuals find services to be acceptable (Attkisson & Zwick, 1982; Larsen et al., 1979). Items are rated in Likert type scales ranging from 1 to 4 (e.g., 1 = Quite dissatisfied, 2 = indifferent or mildly dissatisfied, 3 = Mostly satisfied, 4 = Very satisfied). The measure utilizes a summed score (range: 8-32), with higher values being indicative of higher levels of acceptability for the services received by respondents. Items cover a broad array of acceptability standards (e.g., "How satisfied are you with the amount of help you received?", "Have the services you received helped you to deal more effectively with your problems?"). |
Immediately after intervention |
|
Secondary |
Acceptability of Intervention |
The acceptability of the intervention will be measured utilizing the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8). The CSQ-8 is an 8-item instrument assessing the degree to which individuals find services to be acceptable (Attkisson & Zwick, 1982; Larsen et al., 1979). Items are rated in Likert type scales ranging from 1 to 4 (e.g., 1 = Quite dissatisfied, 2 = indifferent or mildly dissatisfied, 3 = Mostly satisfied, 4 = Very satisfied). The measure utilizes a summed score (range: 8-32), with higher values being indicative of higher levels of acceptability for the services received by respondents. Items cover a broad array of acceptability standards (e.g., "How satisfied are you with the amount of help you received?", "Have the services you received helped you to deal more effectively with your problems?"). |
Two weeks after intervention |
|
Secondary |
Acceptability of Intervention |
The acceptability of the intervention will be measured utilizing the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8). The CSQ-8 is an 8-item instrument assessing the degree to which individuals find services to be acceptable (Attkisson & Zwick, 1982; Larsen et al., 1979). Items are rated in Likert type scales ranging from 1 to 4 (e.g., 1 = Quite dissatisfied, 2 = indifferent or mildly dissatisfied, 3 = Mostly satisfied, 4 = Very satisfied). The measure utilizes a summed score (range: 8-32), with higher values being indicative of higher levels of acceptability for the services received by respondents. Items cover a broad array of acceptability standards (e.g., "How satisfied are you with the amount of help you received?", "Have the services you received helped you to deal more effectively with your problems?"). |
One month after intervention |
|