The association of bullying with suicide ideation and attempt among adolescents with different dimensions of sexual orientation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Sexual minority youth are at increased risk for bullying and suicide, but they are heterogeneous in their sexual orientation dimensions (attraction, behavior and identity). Objective To compare the association of bullying and suicide parameters between (1) heterosexually identified students without same-sex attractions or behaviors (2) heterosexually identified students with same-sex attractions or behaviors and (3) non-heterosexually identified students. Methods The Quebec Youth Risk Behavior Survey was a self-report questionnaire given to 1852 students 14–18 years old. Results The heterosexually identified students without same-sex attraction or behavior, and no bullying, was our reference group. When these students had bullying, the likelihood of suicidal ideation was double, but their likelihood of suicide attempts was the same. For non-heterosexually identified students, those with no bullying were twice as likely, and those with bullying were four times as likely to have suicidal ideation. When these students had no bullying, they were not more likely to have suicide attempts, but they were almost three times as likely when they had bullying. Heterosexually identified students with same-sex attraction or behavior were never more likely on any of the suicide measures. Conclusion This study was the first to show that adolescents with a non-heterosexual identity will have a disproportionately greater likelihood in their suicide parameters when subject to bullying, than heterosexually identified students with or without same-sex attraction or behavior, suggesting that these latter two dimensions were non-contributory to suicide risk. The significance of identity as a predictor of suicidal ideation and behavior will be discussed. Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".