A Pilot Study of Mobile Telephone Message Interventions with Suicide Attempters in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In China, where follow-up with hospitalized attempters is generally lacking, there is a great need for inexpensive and effective means of maintaining contact and decreasing recidivism. AIMS: Our objective was to test whether mobile telephone message contacts after discharge would be feasible and acceptable to suicide attempters in China. METHODS: Fifteen participants were recruited from suicide attempters seen in the Emergency Department in Wuhan, China, to participate in a pilot study to receive mobile telephone messages after discharge. All participants have access to a mobile telephone, and there is no charge for the user to receive text messages. RESULTS: Most participants (12) considered the text message contacts an acceptable and useful form of help and would like to continue to receive them for a longer period of time. CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that, as a low-cost and quick method of intervention in areas where more intensive follow-up is not practical or available, telephone messages contacts are accessible, feasible, and acceptable to suicide attempters. We hope that this will inspire future research on regular and long-term message interventions to prevent recidivism in suicide attempters.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".