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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

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