Gatekeeper Training as a Preventative Intervention for Suicide: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Suicide prevention remains a challenge across communities in North America and abroad. We examine a suicide prevention effort that is widely used, termed gatekeeper training. There are 2 aims: review the state of the evidence on gatekeeper training for suicide prevention, and propose directions for further research. METHOD: Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (PubMed) and PsycINFO from inception to the present for the key words suicide, suicide prevention, and gatekeeper. In addition, a manual scan of relevant articles' bibliographies was undertaken. RESULTS: Gatekeeper training has been implemented and studied in many populations, including military personnel, public school staff, peer helpers, clinicians, and Aboriginal people. This type of training has been shown to positively affect the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of trainees regarding suicide prevention. Large-scale cohort studies in military personnel and physicians have reported promising results with a significant reduction in suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and deaths by suicide. CONCLUSIONS: Gatekeeper training is successful at imparting knowledge, building skills, and molding the attitudes of trainees; however, more work needs to be done on longevity of these traits and referral patterns of gatekeepers. There is a need for randomized controlled trials. In addition, the unique effect of gatekeeper training on suicide rates needs to be fully elucidated.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it