Repetition of Attempted Suicide among Immigrants in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare frequencies of suicide attempt repetition in immigrants and local European populations, and the timing of repetition in these groups. METHOD: Data from 7 European countries, comprising 10 574 local and 3032 immigrant subjects, were taken from the World Health Organization European Multicentre Study on Suicidal Behaviour and the ensuing Monitoring Suicidal Behaviour in Europe (commonly referred to as MONSUE) project. The relation between immigrant status and repetition of suicide attempt within 12-months following first registered attempt was analyzed with binary logistic regression, controlling for sex, age, and method of attempt. Timing of repetition was controlled for sex, age, and the recommended type of aftercare. RESULTS: Lower odds of repeating a suicide attempt were found in Eastern European (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.61, P < 0.001) and non-European immigrants (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.90, P < 0.05), compared with the locals. Similar patterns were identified in the sex-specific analysis. Eastern European immigrants tended to repeat their attempt much later than locals (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.93, P < 0.05). In general, 32% of all repetition occurred within 30 days. Repetition tended to decrease with age and was more likely in females using harder methods in their index attempt (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.54, P < 0.01). Large variations in the general repetition frequency were identified between the collecting centres, thus influencing the results. CONCLUSIONS: The lower repetition frequencies in non-Western immigrants, compared with locals, in Europe stands in contrast to their markedly higher tendency to attempt suicide in general, possibly pointing to situational stress factors related to their suicidal crisis that are less persistent over time. Our findings also raise the possibility that suicide attempters and repeaters constitute only partially overlapping populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".