Clinical Prediction of Suicide Attempt in Schizophrenia Using a Machine Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Suicide is a major concern for those afflicted by schizophrenia. Identifying patients at the highest risk for future suicide attempts remains a complex problem for psychiatric intervention. Machine learning models allow for the integration of many risk factors in order to build an algorithm that predicts which patients are likely to attempt suicide. Currently, it is unclear how to integrate previously identified risk factors into a clinically relevant predictive tool to estimate the probability of a patient with schizophrenia for attempting suicide. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional assessment on a sample of 345 participants diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Suicide attempters and non-attempters were clearly identified using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) and the Beck Suicide Ideation Scale (BSS). We developed two classification algorithms using a regularized regression and random forest model with sociocultural and clinical variables as features to train the models. Results Both classification models performed similarly in identifying suicide attempters and non-attempters. Our regularized logistic regression model demonstrated an accuracy of 66% and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.71, while the random forest model demonstrated 65% accuracy and an AUC of 0.67. Conclusion Machine learning algorithms offer a relatively successful method for incorporating many clinical features to predict individuals at risk for future suicide attempts. Increased performance of these models using clinically relevant variables offers the potential to facilitate early treatment and intervention to prevent future suicide attempts. 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".