Child abuse and the prevalence of suicide attempts among those reporting suicide ideation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Victims of child abuse may be at increased risk of acting on suicide ideation, although this has not been empirically tested. We estimated the risk of suicide attempts associated with child abuse among individuals who reported suicide ideation. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from the population-based Canadian Community Health Survey Mental Health (n = 828). This population-based survey included various structured questionnaires, including the Composite International Diagnostic Interview to assess mental illness and suicidal thoughts and behaviours. RESULTS: Approximately 80 % of those who attempted suicide had a history of child abuse. Poor mental health, financial difficulties, poor coping skills, and reporting a suicide plan were also associated with an increased prevalence of attempting suicide; adjusted for these factors, child abuse was associated with a 1.77-fold increased prevalence (95 % CI 0.93, 3.36) of suicide attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals who attempt suicide experience child abuse, and worse health and social functioning. Adopting a life-course perspective to understand trajectories of suicide risk factors may inform prevention and treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".