MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941825877 · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30077-x

In-utero and perinatal influences on suicide risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2941825877 on OpenAlexafffund
Massimiliano Orri, David Gunnell, Stéphane Richard‐Devantoy, Despina Bolanis, Jill Boruff, Gustavo Turecki, Marie‐Claude Geoffroy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Psychiatry · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversity of BristolDepartment of Health and Social CareCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation TrustNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and DepressionAmerican Foundation for Suicide Prevention
KeywordsMedicineSuicidal ideationOdds ratioPoison controlMeta-analysisPsycINFOPopulationIn uteroPediatricsSuicide attemptSuicide preventionPregnancyObstetricsMEDLINEFetusInternal medicineMedical emergencyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Adverse in-utero and perinatal conditions might contribute to an increased suicide risk throughout the lifespan; however, existing evidence is sparse and contradictory. We aimed to investigate in-utero and perinatal exposures associated with suicide, suicide attempt, and suicidal ideation. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis and searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO from inception to Jan 24, 2019, for population-based prospective studies that investigated the association between in-utero and perinatal factors and suicide, suicide attempt, and suicidal ideation. Only papers published in English in peer-reviewed journals were considered. Two researchers independently extracted formal information (eg, country, year, duration of follow-up) and number of cases and non-cases exposed and non-exposed to each risk factor. We calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs using random-effects models and used meta-regression to investigate heterogeneity. This study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018091205. Findings We identified 42 eligible studies; they had a low risk of bias (median quality score 9/9 [IQR 8–9]). Family or parental characteristics, such as high birth order (eg, for fourth-born or later-born vs first-born, pooled OR 1·51 [95% CIs 1·21–1·88]), teenage mothers (1·80 [1·52–2·14]), single mothers (1·57 [1·31–1·89]); indices of socioeconomic position, such as low maternal (1·36 [1·28–1·46]) and paternal (1·38 [1·27–1·51]) education; and fetal growth (eg, low birthweight 1·30 [1·09–1·55] and small for gestational age 1·18 [1·00–1·40]) were associated with higher suicide risk. Father's age, low gestational age, obstetric characteristics (eg, caesarean section), and condition or exposure during pregnancy (eg, maternal smoking or hypertensive disease) were not associated with higher suicide risk. Similar patterns of associations were observed for suicide attempt and suicidal ideation; however, these results were based on a lower number of studies. In meta-regression, differences in length of follow-up explained most between-study heterogeneity (inital I2 ranged from 0 to 79·5). Interpretation These findings suggest that prenatal and perinatal characteristics are associated with increased suicide risk during the life course, supporting the developmental origin of health and diseases hypothesis for suicide. The low number of studies for some risk factors, especially for suicide attempt and ideation, leaves gaps in knowledge that need to be addressed. The mechanisms underlying the reported associations and their causal nature still remain unclear. Funding Horizon 2020 (EU).

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations63
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet PsychiatrySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207