MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133696925 · doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.113.139949

Developmental model of suicide trajectories

2014· article· en· W2133696925 on OpenAlexafffund
Monique Séguin, Guy Beauchamp, Marie Robert, Mélanie DiMambro, Gustavo Turecki

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal of Psychiatry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsPsychosocialPsychologySuicide preventionStructural equation modelingPath analysis (statistics)Poison controlDevelopmental psychologyLife course approachSocial isolationInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most developmental studies on suicide do not take into account individual variations in suicide trajectories. AIMS: Using a life course approach, this study explores developmental models of suicide trajectories. METHOD: Two hundred and fourteen suicides were assessed with mixed methods. Statistical analysis using combined discrete-time survival (DTS) and growth mixture modelling (GMM) generated various trajectories, and path analysis (Mplus) identified exogenous and mediating variables associated with these trajectories. RESULTS: Two groups share common risk factors, and independently of these major risk factors, they have different developmental trajectories: the first group experienced a high burden of adversity and died by suicide in their early 20s; and the second group experienced a somewhat moderate or low burden of adversity before they took their own life. Structural equation modelling identified variables specific to the early suicide trajectory: conduct and behavioural difficulties, social isolation/conflicts mediated by school-related difficulties, the end of a love relationship, and previous suicide attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial adversity between 10 and 20 years of age may warrant key periods of intervention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations88
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe British Journal of PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207