MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794728717 · doi:10.1186/s12888-017-1586-6

Suicide and deliberate self-harm in Pakistan: a scoping review

2018· review· en· W2794728717 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sualeha Siddiq Shekhani, Shagufta Perveen, Dur-e-Sameen Hashmi, Khawaja Akbar, Sara Bachani, Murad Moosa Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychiatry · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterUniversity of AlbertaJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsCINAHLGrey literatureMEDLINEScience Citation IndexMedicineSocial Sciences Citation IndexCochrane LibraryPoison controlCitation indexCitationFamily medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicineEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionLibrary sciencePathologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a major global public health problem with more than 800,000 incidents worldwide annually. Seventy-five percent of the global suicides occur in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Pakistan is a LMIC where information on suicidal behavior is limited. The aim of the review is to map available literature on determinants, risk factors and other variables of suicidal behavior in Pakistan. METHOD: This study was based on Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework of scoping review, combining peer reviewed publications with grey literature. Ten databases including Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), Cochrane Trials Register (CRG), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), National Library of Medicine Gateway (NLMG), ExcerptaMedica (EMBASE), National Library of Medicine's MEDLINE (PUBMED), PSYCHINFO, Social Science Citation Index and Science Citation Index (SCI) and Pakmedinet.com were searched from the beginning of their time frames until December 2016 using a combination of key terms. The inclusion criteria included studies of various study designs covering different aspects of suicidal behavior in English language. RESULTS: Six hundred and twenty three articles were initially retrieved from all ten databases. Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts for relevance. One hundred and eighteen articles were read in full, out of which 11 were excluded because they did not fit the eligibility criteria. One hundred and ten articles, including two student theses and one report, were included in the final review. Most studies were descriptive in nature, with only three that used a case-control design. Majority of the studies were from urban areas, and addressed determinants rather than risk factors. Gender differences and age were predominantly reported, with more males committing suicide. Suicidal behavior was more common among individuals younger than 30 years of age. The three most common methods for suicides were hanging, poisoning and use of firearms. Mental illness as a risk factor for suicides was mentioned in only three studies. CONCLUSIONS: This review is the first attempt to synthesize available literature on suicidal behavior in Pakistan. The evidence is limited, and calls for more robust analytical research designs, along with a focus on risk factors.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0170.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations119
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207