Characteristics of suicidal ideation that predict the transition to future suicide attempts in adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study sought to examine characteristics of suicidal ideation (SI) that predict a future suicide attempt (SA), beyond psychiatric diagnosis and previous SA history. METHODS: Participants were 506 adolescents (307 female) who completed the Columbia Suicide Screen (CSS) and selected modules from the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (C-DISC 2.3) as part of a two-stage high school screening and who were followed up 4-6 years later to assess for a SA since baseline. At baseline, participants who endorsed SI on the CSS responded to four questions regarding currency, frequency, seriousness, and duration of their SI. A subsample of 122 adolescents who endorsed SI at baseline also completed a detailed interview about their most recent SI. RESULTS: Thinking about suicide often (OR = 3.5, 95% CI = 1.7-7.2), seriously (OR = 3.1, 95% CI = 1.4-6.7), and for a long time (OR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.1-5.2) were associated with a future SA, adjusting for sex, the presence of a mood, anxiety, and substance use diagnosis, and baseline SA history. However, only SI frequency was significantly associated with higher odds of a future SA (OR = 3.6, 95% CI = 1.4-9.1) when also adjusting for currency, seriousness, and duration. Among ideators interviewed further about their most recent SI, ideating 1 hr or more (vs. less than 1 hr) was associated with a future SA (OR = 3.6, 95% CI = 1.0-12.7), adjusting for sex, depressive symptoms, previous SA history, and other baseline SI characteristics, and it was also associated with making a future SA earlier. CONCLUSIONS: Assessments of SI in adolescents should take special care to inquire about frequency of their SI, along with length of their most recent SI.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".