Adopting an ecological public health approach to suicide prevention - the cases of Turkey and Canada: why can’t we get there?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicide remains as a major public health problem in both Turkey and Canada; there has been a slight upward trend in suicide rates from the 1950s until present day. These nations also share the same distribution pattern of suicide wherein rural and remote populations have a significantly elevated risk of suicide compared to their urban counterparts. In both nations, regrettably, suicide prevention has, in the main, focused narrowly on identifying proximate, individual level risk factors, rather than on population mental health. However national statistical data on suicide rates indicates that such prevention strategies have achieved only limited success. In light of these data, there is a pressing need to reconsider our approach to preventing\nsuicide and thus this paper: 1) provides an overview of ecological approaches; 2) constructs an argument for an ecological approach to suicide prevention;\n3) considers nascent examples from other federated countries that have enacted national strategies that may provide lessons for Turkey and Canada. Drawing on extant, international examples of ecological approaches to suicide prevention the authors make the argument that both Turkey and Canada need to embrace and enact such approaches, particularly given the efficacy of ecological public health approaches to reach rural and remote populations.
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 | 0.002 | 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".