Depression and Suicidality in Gay Men: Implications for Health Care Providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gay men are a subgroup vulnerable to depression and suicidality. The prevalence of depression among gay men is three times higher than the general adult population. Because depression is a known risk factor for suicide, gay men are also at high risk for suicidality. Despite the high prevalence of depression and suicidality, health researchers and health care providers have tended to focus on sexual health issues, most often human immunodeficiency virus in gay men. Related to this, gay men's health has often been defined by sexual practices, and poorly understood are the intersections of gay men's physical and mental health with social determinants of health including ethnicity, locale, education level, and socioeconomic status. In the current article summated is literature addressing risk factors for depression and suicidality among gay men including family acceptance of their sexual identities, social cohesion and belonging, internalized stigma, and victimization. Barriers to gay men's help seeking are also discussed in detailing how health care providers might advance the well-being of this underserved subgroup by effectively addressing depression and suicidality.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".