MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473627925 · doi:10.1177/0706743716659245

School- and Community-Based Youth Suicide Prevention Interventions: Hot Idea, Hot Air, or Sham?

2016· review· en· W2473627925 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stan Kutcher, Yifeng Wei, Pegah Behzadi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionSuicide preventionPsychologyPoison controlInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational safety and healthMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suicide in young people is a significant health concern, with numerous community- and school-based interventions promising to prevent suicide currently being applied across Canada. Before widespread application of any one of these, it is essential to determine its effectiveness and safety. We systematically reviewed the global literature on one of the most common community suicide prevention interventions in Canada and summarized data on 2 commonly applied school-based suicide prevention programmes. None of these has demonstrated effectiveness in preventing youth suicide or safety in application. Concurrently with their widespread distribution in Canada, the suicide rate in young women has increased-the first time in over 3 decades. Policy and regulatory implications of these findings are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations40
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207