MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785959012 · doi:10.1177/0093854818754609

Attempted Suicide: A Multilevel Examination of Inmate Characteristics and Prison Context

2018· article· en· W2785959012 on OpenAlexaff
Bryce E. Stoliker

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonOddsContext (archaeology)Suicide preventionMental healthPoison controlPsychologyWitnessPsychiatryInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsMultilevel modelPopulationOccupational safety and healthClinical psychologyMedicineCriminologyMedical emergencyLogistic regressionEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Correctional institutions in the United States witness higher rates of suicide compared with the general population, as well as a higher number of attempted suicides compared with completed cases. Prison research focused little attention on investigating the combined effects of inmate characteristics and prison context on suicide, with studies using only one level of analysis (prison or prisoner) and neglecting the nested nature of inmates in prisons. To extend this literature, multilevel modeling techniques were employed to investigate individual- and prison-contextual predictive patterns of attempted suicide using a nationally representative sample of 18,185 inmates in 326 prisons across the United States. Results revealed that several individual-level factors predicted odds for attempted suicide, such as inmate characteristics/demographics, prison experiences, having a serious mental illness, and symptoms of mental health issues. Some prison-contextual variables, as well as cross-level interaction effects, also significantly predicted odds for attempted suicide. Policy and research implications 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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations48
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207