Suicidal ideation in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Suicide is a leading cause of mortality in schizophrenia. The study attempts to find an association of suicidal ideation, a less studied entity than suicide attempt, with various sociodemographic and clinical profiles in patients with schizophrenia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: It is a cross-sectional study involving 140 patients diagnosed as schizophrenia. Sociodemographic and clinical profiles were collected using a semi-structured proforma. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, InterSePT Scale for Suicidal Thinking, and Drug Attitude Inventory-10 were applied to assess psychopathology, depressive symptoms, suicidal ideas, and attitude toward psychotropics, respectively. The analysis was done using appropriate statistics. RESULTS: Majority of the study sample were Hindus, male, unmarried, literate, unemployed, and belonging from lower socioeconomic class. About 25.7% attempted suicide earlier and 29.3% currently have suicidal ideation. A previous suicide attempt, family history of psychiatric illness and that of suicide and comorbid substance use, significantly predicted (p < 0.05) a current suicidal ideation. Ideation has also been found to be significantly correlated to comorbid depression and the positive, negative, emotional, and excitement domains of schizophrenic psychopathology. CONCLUSION: The current study shows suicidal ideations in schizophrenia patients to be significantly related to schizophrenic psychopathology and comorbid depression, thus calling for a holistic management in preventing a fatal outcome.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".