MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1860575937 · doi:10.1080/13607863.2015.1078279

Reasons for living, meaning in life, and suicide ideation: investigating the roles of key positive psychological factors in reducing suicide risk in community-residing older adults

2015· article· en· W1860575937 on OpenAlexaff
Marnin J. Heisel, Eva Neufeld, Gordon L. Flett

Bibliographic record

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityLaurentian UniversityLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessPsychologySuicidal ideationClinical psychologyDiscriminant validityPoison controlSuicide preventionMental healthCognitionInjury preventionPsychiatryPsychometricsMedicineInternal consistencyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the roles of reasons for living (RFL) and meaning in life (MIL) in potentially promoting mental health and well-being and protecting against suicide ideation among community-residing older adults and to investigate the psychometric properties of the Reasons for Living Scale-Older Adult version (RFL-OA). METHOD: Of 173 older adults initially recruited into a longitudinal study on late-life suicide ideation, 109 completed the RFL-OA and measures of cognitive and physical functioning and positive and negative psychological factors at a two-year follow-up assessment. We tested a model in which RFL and MIL protect against suicide ideation, controlling for demographic and clinical factors. We also assessed the psychometric properties of the RFL-OA in community-residing older adults, investigating its internal consistency and its convergent (MIL, perceived social support, and life satisfaction), divergent (loneliness, depressive symptom severity, and suicide ideation), and discriminant validity (cognitive and physical functioning). RESULTS: RFL-OA scores explained significant variance in suicide ideation, controlling for age, sex, depressive symptom severity, and loneliness. MIL explained significant unique variance in suicide ideation, controlling for these factors and RFL, and MIL significantly mediated the association between RFL and suicide ideation. Psychometric analyses indicated strong internal consistency (α = .94), convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity for the RFL-OA relative to positive and negative psychological factors and cognitive and physical functioning. CONCLUSION: These findings add to a growing body of literature suggesting merit in investigating positive psychological factors together with negative factors when assessing suicide risk and planning psychological services for older adults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations128
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging & Mental HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207