Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and suicide ideation in community adults in Portugal: preliminary data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic state of emergency in Portugal and the contribution of several socio-demographic and clinical variables, including having had a psychiatric diagnosis, on suicide ideation. Further, we tested whether the perceived impact of the pandemic mediated the association between having had a psychiatric diagnosis and suicide ideation.METHODS: A sample of 227 Portuguese community adults (183 women, 44 men) participated online.RESULTS: Low education, having had a psychiatric diagnosis, and the perceived psychological impact of the pandemic each related to the presence of suicide ideation. Perceived psychological impact partially mediated the association between having had a psychiatric diagnosis and suicide ideation, as indexed by the total score on the Suicide Ideation Scale.CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with a psychiatric diagnosis, with a lower education level, and with a perceived psychological impact of the pandemic are at greater risk for experiencing suicide ideation, and psychological impact appears to be stronger for persons with a psychiatric diagnosis and, thus, resulting in more suicide ideation. A potential limitation was the use of only three items for assessing the impact of the pandemic.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".