MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041343696 · doi:10.7870/cjcmh-2000-0015

Suicide Prevention in Canada: A History of a Community Approach

2000· article· en· W2041343696 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Antoon A. Leenaars

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Community Mental Health · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Suicide preventionMental healthPolitical sciencePublic healthSuicide ratesEconomic growthPoison controlEnvironmental healthPsychologyMedicinePsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suicide is a major mental health and public health problem in Canada. Canada's suicide rate ranks above average in comparison to countries around the world. The prevention of suicide predates the European presence in Canada and much can be learned from these endeavours. Current efforts grew largely from the grass roots, with little government support or initiative (with a few provincial/territorial exceptions). Canada's community efforts have been diverse and inclusive. Among such efforts have been: (a) traditional approaches among Native peoples, (b) the establishment of the first crisis centre in Sudbury in the 1960s, (c) the development of a comprehensive model in Alberta, (d) the beginning of a survivor movement in the 1980s, and (e) the national prevention efforts of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention. There are, however, striking lacks--most notable among them the paucity of support for research in Canada. Future efforts will call for even greater community response to prevent suicide and to promote wellness.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0140.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Community Mental HealthSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207