Suicide and no axis I psychopathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear why approximately 10% of suicide completers seem to be psychiatrically normal. To better understand this issue, we studied suicide completers without an axis I diagnosis and compared them, on measures of psychopathology other than axis I, to normal controls and suicide cases with axis I psychopathology. METHODS: 168 suicide cases were examined by way of a psychological autopsy with the best possible informant. Sixteen cases did not meet criteria for an axis I diagnosis; each of these cases was then age and gender matched to 52 suicide completers with an axis I disorder and 110 normal controls. RESULTS: Fourteen of sixteen suicide cases without an axis I diagnosis had detectable abnormalities that were more similar to the axis I diagnosed suicide group than to a living group. Both suicide groups were similar in the total number of past suicide attempts, the total number of individuals with an axis II disorder, and similar scores on measures of impulsive-aggressive behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that most of the individuals who committed suicide and appeared psychiatrically normal after a psychological autopsy may probably have an underlying psychiatric process that the psychological autopsy method, as commonly carried out, failed to detect.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".