The utility of artificial intelligence in suicide risk prediction and the management of suicidal behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Suicide is a growing public health concern with a global prevalence of approximately 800,000 deaths per year. The current process of evaluating suicide risk is highly subjective, which can limit the efficacy and accuracy of prediction efforts. Consequently, suicide detection strategies are shifting toward artificial intelligence platforms that can identify patterns within 'big data' to generate risk algorithms that can determine the effects of risk (and protective) factors on suicide outcomes, predict suicide outbreaks and identify at-risk individuals or populations. In this review, we summarize the role of artificial intelligence in optimizing suicide risk prediction and behavior management. METHODS: This paper provides a general review of the literature. A literature search was conducted in OVID Medline, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases with coverage from January 1990 to June 2019. Results were restricted to peer-reviewed, English-language articles. Conference and dissertation proceedings, case reports, protocol papers and opinion pieces were excluded. Reference lists were also examined for additional articles of relevance. RESULTS: At the individual level, prediction analytics help to identify individuals in crisis to intervene with emotional support, crisis and psychoeducational resources, and alerts for emergency assistance. At the population level, algorithms can identify at-risk groups or suicide hotspots, which help inform resource mobilization, policy reform and advocacy efforts. Artificial intelligence has also been used to support the clinical management of suicide across diagnostics and evaluation, medication management and behavioral therapy delivery. There could be several advantages of incorporating artificial intelligence into suicide care, which includes a time- and resource-effective alternative to clinician-based strategies, adaptability to various settings and demographics, and suitability for use in remote locations with limited access to mental healthcare supports. CONCLUSION: Based on the observed benefits to date, artificial intelligence has a demonstrated utility within suicide prediction and clinical management efforts and will continue to advance mental healthcare forward.
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 | 0.009 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".