The Feasibility and Clinical Utility of Conducting a Confidential Inquiry Into Suicide in Southwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Given the effectiveness of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness (NCI) in the UK, the present study evaluated this approach in Southwestern Ontario. A systematic confidential examination of suicides in Ontario was developed to guide quality improvement of services and suicide prevention. METHOD: A 3-year case series of consecutive suicides in Southwestern Ontario identified by the Office of the Chief Coroner was compiled. Clinicians who provided care to suicide decedents completed an online confidential suicide questionnaire offered through a secured portal. RESULTS: A total of 476 suicide cases were analyzed. In all, 270 invitations to clinicians were sent, 237 (87.8%) responded to the invitation and 187 (69.3%) completed the online questionnaire. The majority of the suicide decedents (54.6%, n = 260), were between the ages of 40 and 64 (x = 47.2, SD = 17.1), White (91.4%, n = 416), single (34.2%, n = 439), and male (74.4%, n = 476). Of the 86 cases of self-poisoning, prescription medications were used in 66.3%. Almost two thirds of decedents visited the clinician in the month prior to their death. LIMITATIONS: The results of the survey were drawn from suicides in Southwestern Ontario and generalizing these findings should be done with caution. CONCLUSION: This study highlights (a) the value of the clinicians' survey to identify gaps in clinical services and (b) the necessity of improvements in suicide risk assessment/management and restriction of prescription medications.
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 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".