MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association of Psychotic Experiences With Subsequent Risk of Suicidal Ideation, Suicide Attempts, and Suicide Deaths

2018· review· en· W2902246227 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueJAMA Psychiatry · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidal ideationPsychiatryPsycINFOPoison controlPopulationSuicide preventionPsychopathologyClinical psychologyOdds ratioPsychologyMedicineSuicide attemptMEDLINEMedical emergencyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Recent research has highlighted that psychotic experiences are far more prevalent than psychotic disorders and associated with the full range of mental disorders. A particularly strong association between psychotic experiences and suicidal behavior has recently been noted. Objective: To provide a quantitative synthesis of the literature examining the longitudinal association between psychotic experiences and subsequent suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide deaths in the general population. Data Sources: We searched PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO from their inception until September 2017 for longitudinal population studies on psychotic experiences and subsequent suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide death. Study Selection: Two authors searched for original articles that reported a prospective assessment of psychotic experiences and suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, or suicide death in general population samples, with at least 1 follow-up point. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors conducted independent data extraction. Authors of included studies were contacted for information where necessary. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. We calculated pooled odds ratios using a random-effects model. A secondary analysis assessed the mediating role of co-occurring psychopathology. Main Outcomes and Measures: Psychotic experiences and subsequent suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide death. Results: Of a total of 2540 studies retrieved, 10 met inclusion criteria. These 10 studies reported on 84 285 participants from 12 different samples and 23 countries. Follow-up periods ranged from 1 month to 27 years. Individuals who reported psychotic experiences had an increase in the odds of future suicidal ideation (5 articles; n = 56 191; odds ratio [OR], 2.39 [95% CI,1.62-3.51]), future suicide attempt (8 articles; n = 66 967; OR, 3.15 [95% CI, 2.23-4.45]), and future suicide death (1 article; n = 15 049; OR, 4.39 [95% CI, 1.63-11.78]). Risk was increased in excess of that explained by co-occurring psychopathology: suicidal ideation (adjusted OR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.09-2.32]) and suicide attempt (adjusted OR, 2.68 [95% CI, 1.71-4.21]). Conclusions and Relevance: Individuals with psychotic experiences are at increased risk of suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide death. Psychotic experiences are important clinical markers of risk for future suicidal behavior.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.505
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.309 · 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