Association between exposure to suicide and suicidality outcomes in youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ecological studies support the hypothesis that suicide may be "contagious" (i.e., exposure to suicide may increase the risk of suicide and related outcomes). However, this association has not been adequately assessed in prospective studies. We sought to determine the association between exposure to suicide and suicidality outcomes in Canadian youth. METHODS: We used baseline information from the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth between 1998/99 and 2006/07 with follow-up assessments 2 years later. We included all respondents aged 12-17 years in cycles 3-7 with reported measures of exposure to suicide. RESULTS: We included 8766 youth aged 12-13 years, 7802 aged 14-15 years and 5496 aged 16-17 years. Exposure to a schoolmate's suicide was associated with ideation at baseline among respondents aged 12-13 years (odds ratio [OR] 5.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.04-8.40), 14-15 years (OR 2.93, 95% CI 2.02-4.24) and 16-17 years (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.43-3.48). Such exposure was associated with attempts among respondents aged 12-13 years (OR 4.57, 95% CI 2.39-8.71), 14-15 years (OR 3.99, 95% CI 2.46-6.45) and 16-17 years (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.62-6.41). Personally knowing someone who died by suicide was associated with suicidality outcomes for all age groups. We also assessed 2-year outcomes among respondents aged 12-15 years: a schoolmate's suicide predicted suicide attempts among participants aged 12-13 years (OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.05-8.96) and 14-15 years (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.47-5.04). Among those who reported a schoolmate's suicide, personally knowing the decedent did not alter the risk of suicidality. INTERPRETATION: We found that exposure to suicide predicts suicide ideation and attempts. Our results support school-wide interventions over current targeted interventions, particularly over strategies that target interventions toward children closest to the decedent.
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".