Coping skills among adolescent suicide attempters: results of a multisite study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: A multisite study was undertaken to advance our understanding of how coping skills, depression, and suicidal ideation are related among adolescents who attempt suicide. Two hypotheses were postulated: productive coping and nonproductive coping would be associated, respectively, with lower and higher depression scores when age, sex, and stressful life events (SLEs) were controlled; and productive coping and nonproductive coping would be associated, respectively, with the presence and absence of suicidal ideation when age, sex, and SLEs were controlled. METHODS: Participants were 167 adolescents (13 to 17 years of age) hospitalized for attempting suicide in 5 pediatric departments across France. Four instruments were administered: the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Present and Lifetime Version, the Adolescent Coping Scale, the Life Events Questionnaire, and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Descriptive analyses and univariate and multiple regression models were completed. RESULTS: Both hypotheses were confirmed. Focus on the positive emerged as a significant variable in both models; depression emerged as a significant variable in the suicidal ideation model. The only sex difference observed was that girls made greater use of wishful thinking and seek social support. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that coping skills are important mechanisms through which depression and suicidal ideation are maintained after attempting suicide. In intervening with adolescents who have attempted suicide, it may be useful to emphasize cognitive work geared to looking on the bright side, positive thinking, and fighting depression.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".