The Heterogeneity of Suicide Attempters: An Analysis of Single- and Repeat-Suicide Attempters Among People in Custody
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicide attempters represent a heterogeneous group, whereby repeat-suicide attempters possess a differing risk profile compared with single-suicide attempters. Using cross-sectional data from a nationally representative sample of 18,185 people in custody in the United States, the current study compared repeat-suicide attempters ( n = 1,549) to single-suicide attempters ( n = 1,146), and compared single- and repeat-suicide attempters to suicide ideators ( n = 1,741), on a range of correlates. Multiple suicide attempts were more commonly reported than a single attempt, especially among women. Several factors differentiated repeat-suicide attempters from single-suicide attempters, with men and women exhibiting some similarities and differences in correlates of repeat- versus single-suicide attempts. Several factors also differentiated single- and repeat-suicide attempters from suicide ideators. Overall, repeat-suicide attempters exhibited greater vulnerability to respond to stress through means of suicide as compared with single-suicide attempters. Discussion emphasizes the importance of acknowledging the heterogeneity of suicide attempters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".