MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W202618317 · doi:10.1177/070674371405900901

Suicide Risk among Active and Retired Canadian Soldiers: The Role of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

2014· editorial· en· W202618317 sur OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Alain Brunet, Eva Monson

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2014
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Établissements canadiensMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Mots-clésPosttraumatic stressPoison controlSuicide preventionInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychiatryPsychologyClinical psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This In Review features a primer by Dr Jitender Sareen1 on PTSD and some of its most well-established risk and resilience factors. As noted by Dr Sareen, there is increasing evidence that PTSD is associated with suicidal risk. The second paper in this In Review is a systematic review by Dr Nicola T Fear and colleagues (see Hines et al2) on the PTSD rates observed in various armies of the world following deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan. As this issue of The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry is being prepared, the last members of the CAF have recently returned from Afghanistan. Several suicides by returnees from Afghanistan have been made public and reports have been echoed by the media; as a result, suicidality among the CAF’s active and retired members has once again become a source of concern for all Canadians. According to the most recent report from the DFHP, between 1995 and 2012, there were no statistically significant increases in suicide rates [in the Canadian Forces]. The number of Regular Force male suicides was generally lower than that expected based on Canadian male suicide rates. SMRs comparing CF [Canadian Forces] suicide rates by deployment history to Canadian suicide rates demonstrated that the number of Regular Force male suicides was consistently less than that expected based on Canadian male suicide rates. Rate ratios indicated that those with a history of deployment were not at an increased risk of suicide compared to those who have never been deployed.3, p 3 Stating that military deployment, per se, does not increase the risk of suicide appears to contradict recent published evidence from the United States4,5 as well as results from the CCHS 1.2–CFS. The CCHS 1.2–CFS is a unique cross-sectional survey in the field of psychiatric epidemiology in that it is perhaps the first to have been carried out on a representative sample (N = 8841) of active members from a national army.6 One of its goals was to provide accurate rates of mental disorders, notably PTSD and suicidality, found within the ranks of the CAF to be disclosed, not only to the CAF themselves but also to Canadians at large. In this data set, during their lifetime, 15.4% of the CAF members report some suicidal ideations, and 2.3% report having made at least 1 suicide attempt. Although SMRs stemming from these data are perhaps not at odds with comparable civilian data covering a similar period in Canada,7 according to the figures presented in Table 1, suicide ideations and attempts are multiplied by 4.8 and 4.7, respectively, among CAF members who report a diagnosis of PTSD at some point in their lives. The data pertaining to past-year prevalence reveal an even more pronounced pattern: the odds of reporting suicide ideations or attempts in the past year are multiplied by 11.5 and 31.6, respectively, among PTSD casualties. Although most people who report suicidal ideations do not attempt or die by suicide, in a recent study concerning a large military sample, 38.5% of ideators developed a plan and 34% of ideators with a plan made an attempt on their own life within the following year.4 Table 1 Suicidality in the Canadian Armed Forces according to the CCHS 1.2–CFS Survey Note in Table 1, comparing CAF members whose PTSD is deployment-related to the rest of the sample (that is, those who are either PTSD-free or whose PTSD is not deployment-related) yields weaker and (or) inconsistent findings that seem, at first sight, to support, in part, the DFHP assertions that deployment does not increase suicidality. However, these figures cannot be taken at face value. It is not always understood that the CCHS 1.2–CFS sample does not include members who, year after year, leave the CAF (or are being dismissed) precisely because of deployment-related mental health problems. People who develop mental health problems while employed by the CAF are dismissed from the CAF after about 2 years, if they remain unfit to be deployed. This workplace policy creates a rosy picture of the mental health in the CAF. It comes as no surprise that several people who died by suicide were former CAF personnel. This notion is supported by a mortality analysis of 2800 former CAF personnel, which reveals higher likelihoods of death by suicide by more than 2-fold in excess of their general population cohort for most age groups.8 Despite its flaws, what the data from Table 1 demonstrate unequivocally is that PTSD increases suicidality, irrespective of whether the PTSD was developed as part of a military deployment or otherwise. The claim by the DFHP that deployment is not suicidogenic misses the point that military deployment is traumatogenic, and that PTSD is suicidogenic. It is time to call a spade a spade and acknowledge what the real societal cost of military deployment entails in Canada and elsewhere.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,534
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,926

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,014
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0060,008
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,249 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations12
Publié2014
Routes d'admission4
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Même sujetSuicide and Self-Harm Studies→Travaux en français237 207→