Confidential Survey Into Southwestern Ontario Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of suicide decedents and to explore the pattern of clinical and suicide risk assessment in primary care settings. METHODS: A 3-year case series of consecutive suicides (January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014) in Southwestern Ontario, Canada, identified by the Office of the Chief Coroner of Ontario and Ontario Forensic Pathology Service (OCC/OFPS) was conducted. Clinicians who provided care to suicide decedents completed a confidential suicide questionnaire offered online through a secured portal or by hardcopy. RESULTS: A total of 476 suicide cases were analyzed using data extracted from the OCC/OFPS files or provided by clinicians who had completed the survey. Hanging (42.8%) was the most common method of suicide, followed by self-poisoning (17.9%). More than half of the decedents (51.8%) used psychotropic medications, and 29.4% used opiates to self-poison. Typically, these self-poisonings involved prescribed medications (70.6%). Over two-thirds (67.4%) of suicide decedents had consulted their primary care physician prior to their deaths, and 63.6% had been seen by a physician within 28 days of their death. Suicide risk assessments were reportedly conducted in 87.1% of these visits. Of those who were assessed, the immediate risk of suicide was deemed to be absent in 39.8%, low in 50.0%, moderate in 8.3%, and high in only 1.9%. CONCLUSION: The findings from this confidential survey may be important for the formulation of recommendations that could improve suicide prevention in primary care practice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".