FC02-03 - Suicide attempt and family-environmental factors in adolescence: advocacy for family centered interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Suicidal behavior in adolescence is now well documented with regard to biological and psychological traits, family-environmental factors, and clinical management. In despite of this knowledge, few interventions are based on family therapy. Objectives To examine the association between suicide attempt in the adolescent population in Quebec and family constellation with regard to family structure and family functioning adjusted for socio-economic factors. Methods Data: Social and Health Survey of Children and Adolescents in Quebec State performed in 1999 (Institut de la Statistique du Québec, Canada). Subjects: 1186 adolescents aged 13 years and 1160 adolescents aged 16, and their parents. Outcome: suicide attempt during lifetime. Independant variables: family structure, witnessing interparental violence and parental emotional support. Covariates: family socioeconomic background and demographic variables. Statistics: logistic regression analysis. Results 81 adolescents reported one suicide attempt or more during lifetime, with a significant risk for girls but this risk was independant of age and ethnicity. The adolescents had a 2.5-fold higher risk of suicide attempt when they live in monoparental household (OR=2.46; 95% CI=[1.37-4.42]), a 3.8-fold higher risk when they witnessed interparental violence (OR=3.76; 95% CI=[2.10-6.74], and a 2 to 6-fold higher risk when parental support is low, particularly paternal support. These associations are not modified by familial socioeconomic status. Conclusions These results are concordant with family stress perspective in the un derstanding of suicidal beahvior in adolescents, and this independently of familial socio-economic deprivation. They give arguments for family centered therapy in the panel of interventions in health promotion in adolescence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".