Suicide Risk in Schizophrenia - a follow-up study after 20 years. Part 2: Symptomatology and pharmacotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study prospectively re-evaluated, after a period of 20 years, a cohort of patients with schizophrenia who had been considered to be at high risk for suicide. The outcome and social factors associated with their suicide risk were investigated over the 2 decades. Method Subjects were contacted and interviewed face-to-face by following a questionnaire devised for this purpose. The Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) was administered and ratings were compared to those from the original study. The Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) was administered. Cross tabulations were performed to identify factors associated with increased suicide risk. A psychological autopsy was performed, for those subjects who had committed suicide since the original study. Results:Fourteen of the original 33 high suicide risk schizophrenia patients were found. Three subjects committed suicide during the 20 year period. Among the living subjects, risks for suicide were found to be lower than 20 years ago. Male gender, poor social support, early age of illness onset, current admission to or recent discharge from hospital and a higher level of education were all factors associated with increased suicide risk. Conclusion: Demographic factors and those related to illness course, found in this study to be associated with suicide risk in patients with schizophrenia, are congruous with those mentioned in the literature.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".