MANY HELPING HEARTS: AN EVALUATION OF PEER GATEKEEPER TRAINING IN SUICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature reviews on suicide prevention programs have presented conflicting results on the efficacy of school-based prevention programs. Gatekeeper training and peer helping are both recommended as part of a comprehensive school-based prevention program, yet there is no literary evidence of the systematic evaluation of gatekeeper training for peer helpers. This study evaluated the efficacy of such training with high school peer helpers using a repeated measures design. Significant gains in knowledge about suicide and skills for responding to suicidal peers were evident immediately after training and 3 months later. There was also a significant improvement in positive attitudes toward suicide intervention following training. Although there was no control group, the research offers tentative support for the efficacy of training peer helpers in suicide risk assessment and indicates the importance of additional training for peer helpers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it