MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134752989 · doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0047-x

Association between BDNF levels and suicidal behaviour: a systematic review protocol

2015· review· en· W2134752989 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca B. Eisen, Stefan Perera, Monica Bawor, Laura Banfield, Rebecca Anglin, Luciano Minuzzi, Zainab Samaan

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical CentreSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
FundersBrain and Behavior Research Foundation
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOMedicineMEDLINEPoison controlPsychiatrySuicide preventionInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsClinical psychologyMedical emergencyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a worldwide public health concern that claims close to 1 million lives each year. Suicidal behaviour is a significant risk factor for completed suicide and is much more prevalent than completed suicide. Many internal and external factors contribute to the risk of suicidal behaviour. Recent research has focused on biological markers in suicide risk, including brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). BDNF is a protein involved in the growth, function, and maintenance of the nervous system. It has been implicated in psychiatric disorders and suicide. While some evidence suggests that reduced levels of BDNF are associated with suicide, the precise relationship has yet to be determined. The aim of this study is to review the literature examining the relationship between levels of BDNF and suicidal behaviour. METHODS: A predefined search strategy will be implemented to search the following electronic databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from inception. The articles will be screened by two independent authors (RE and SP) using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus, or by a third author (ZS) in cases of disagreement. The primary outcome will be the association between levels of BDNF and suicidal behaviour. A meta-analysis will be conducted if appropriate. Quality of evidence and risk of bias will be evaluated. DISCUSSION: The findings of this review will assist in identifying and treating individuals at increased risk of suicide. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015015871 .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207