MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049710956 · doi:10.1100/tsw.2005.91

Suicide Behavior in Persons with Intellectual Disability

2005· review· en· W2049710956 on OpenAlexaff
Joav Merrick, Efrat Merrick, Yona Lunsky, Isack Kandel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Scientific World JOURNAL · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSadnessSuicidal ideationIntellectual disabilityPopulationDepression (economics)CONTESTPsychiatryPsychologySuicide preventionPoison controlClinical psychologyMedicineMedical emergencyEnvironmental healthAngerPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suicide is today in the Western world one of the leading causes of death and most people have had suicidal ideation at some time during their life. In the population of persons with intellectual disability some researchers have thought that impaired intellectual capacity could act as a buffer to suicidal behavior, but the fact is that the few studies conducted in that population contest this assumption and showed that the characteristics of suicidality in this population are very similar to persons without intellectual disability. This paper reviews the studies conducted and describe the symptomatology in this population. Professionals working with this population should therefore be aware of and assess for this behavior. Sadness or depression are symptoms that could indicate later suicidal behavior.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Scientific World JOURNALSame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207