MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014285538 · doi:10.1080/13811110490476752

Gun Control and Suicide: Possible Impact of Canadian Legislation to Ensure Safe Storage of Firearms

2004· article· en· W2014285538 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Suicide Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGun Ownership and Violence Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicide preventionPoison controlInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthSuicide ratesLegislationSuicide methodsMedicinePopulationGun controlHuman factors and ergonomicsEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyDemographyPolitical scienceLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1992, the Canadian Firearms Act aimed at ensuring safe storage of firearms was promulgated. This study compares suicide methods 6 years prior to the enactment of the law and 5 years after its enactment. The study encompassed 426 suicide cases from Abitibi-Témiscamingue (Northern Quebec), the region with the highest suicide rate and the highest firearm suicide rate in Quebec. Suicide by firearms decreased in the male and female population. Suicide by hanging increased among youths of both sexes, and suicide by poisoning doubled in the female population. A decrease in firearm suicides was most noticeable in the under-25 age group, although it was in this same age group that the general suicide rate increased the most. The reduction of firearm suicides was not accompanied by a decrease in overall suicide rates.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.332 · 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