Life trajectories towards suicide: developmental role and specificities of adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Considering that adolescence is a crucial period of allostatic maturation, we aimed at testing whether it represents a breakpoint in adversity trajectories to suicide and, relatedly, whether life trajectories of adolescents who died by suicide differ from those of adult counterparts. Method In 303 individuals who died by suicide, a panel of experts derived longitudinal burden of adversity ratings from extensive clinical interviews conducted with informants. Piecewise Joint Latent Class Models allowed to identify patterns of adversity trajectories and test the introduction of breakpoints in life-paths. The classes inferred from the optimal model were compared in terms of socio-demographics, psychopathology and nature of experienced events. Results The most accurate model derived 2 trajectory patterns with a breakpoint in early adolescence. In the first class (n = 43 individuals), the burden of adversity increased steadily from birth to death, which occurred on average at 23 (SE = 1.29). In the second class (n = 259), where individuals died on average at 43 years (SE = 0.96), the burden of adversity followed a similar trajectory during infancy but stabilized between ages 10 and 14 years and rebounded at about 25. The classes differed in terms of childhood family stability, occurrence of dependent events, distal exposure to suicide and intra-family sexual victimization. Conclusion Although subject to inherent limitations of the retrospective designs, our results encourage clinicians and researchers to pay greater attention to the diathetic maturation processes occurring during adolescence when considering suicidal behaviors in young people.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".