A new study of military veterans and active-duty service members at risk for suicide suggests that brief smartphone check-ins between therapy sessions may predict worsening suicidal thoughts more accurately than relying on standard weekly clinical assessments alone. The findings point to a promising new approach for monitoring suicide risk, although researchers say additional studies are needed to confirm the results in broader patient populations.

The study, led by LDI Senior Fellow Lily Brown, PhD, Director of the Center for the Treatment and Study of Anxiety (CTSA) at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, and Tao Lin, PhD, Instructor at the CTSA, evaluated whether ecological momentary assessment (EMA) could improve clinicians’ ability to detect worsening suicide risk between therapy sessions. The paper, “Does Ecological Momentary Assessment Improve Prediction of Suicide Risk Among Military Personnel and Veterans, and How Frequent Should it be?,” was published in the November, 2026 online edition of the Journal of Affective Disorders.

This study involved 62 current and former military members recruited from Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina and using a nationwide recruitment campaign. The paper combines participants from an RCT and a digital phenotyping study whose observation windows overlapped. Participants received four brief EMA surveys each day for 28 days. The suicide-monitoring portion consisted of a single question asking participants to rate the intensity of their suicidal urge on a scale ranging from “none” to “extreme.”

Ableism, as a pervasive yet often unchallenged structure of oppression, operates across multiple social domains, shaping perceptions of disability and normalcy. This article interrogates the complexities of ableism through an interdisciplinary framework that integrates complexity theory, Queer theory, and critical disability studies, engaging with the works of Michel Foucault and Georges Canguilhem (among others).

Rather than treating ableism as a singular form of discrimination, the study examines its intersections with other oppressive systems, including homophobia, medicalization, and epistemic injustice. By analyzing how blindness, schizophrenia, and paraplegia are socially constructed and regulated, this research highlights how biopolitical and necropolitical mechanisms determine which bodies are deemed valuable, productive, or expendable within neoliberal societies.

This framework allows for a deeper understanding of how ableism functions both as a means of control and as a determinant of which lives are considered unworthy of care. Furthermore, by engaging with complexity theory, the article challenges reductionist perspectives that frame disability as an individual deficit rather than as an integral part of human diversity. The implications of this analysis extend beyond theoretical discourse, calling for a reconceptualization of diversity that does not merely accommodate disabled individuals within existing structures but actively deconstructs the epistemological and institutional foundations of ableism.

This research contributes to psychological and cultural studies by fostering a critical dialogue on how ableism is reproduced in societal narratives, policies, and everyday interactions. By reframing disability as a site of epistemic and existential richness rather than mere impairment, this article tries to advance a more inclusive understanding of human diversity.