Association Between Stroke and Subsequent Risk of Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Poor mental health and depression are well-recognized sequelae of stroke; however, the association between stroke and subsequent risk of suicide is unknown. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar from their inception to September 15, 2020, using keywords and database-specific subjects. We independently adjudicated and selected observational studies that reported suicide attempts or death by suicide in stroke survivors and a comparison group, consisting either of people without a history of stroke or the general population. We evaluated study quality using the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Using random-effects meta-analysis, we calculated the pooled adjusted risk ratio (RR) of suicide in stroke survivors and separately calculated the pooled adjusted RR of suicide attempt and death by suicide. Using prespecified analyses, we explored study-level factors to explain heterogeneity. Results: We screened 4093 articles and included 23 studies of fair quality, totaling over 2 million stroke survivors, of whom 5563 attempted suicide or died by suicide. Compared to the nonstroke group, the pooled adjusted RR of suicide in stroke survivors was 1.73 (95% CI, 1.53–1.96, I 2 =93%), with a significantly ( P =0.03) higher adjusted risk of suicide attempt (RR, 2.11 [1.73–2.56]) than of death by suicide (RR, 1.61 [1.41–1.84]). A longer follow-up time in cohort studies was associated with a lower risk of suicide (RR, 0.97 [0.95–0.99] for every 1-year increase). Conclusions: Stroke should be considered as a risk factor for suicide. Comprehensive strategies to screen and treat depression and suicidal ideation in stroke survivors should be developed to reduce the burden of suicide in stroke survivors.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".