MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172362437 · doi:10.1002/jcop.22624

Gatekeeper training for friends and family of individuals at risk of suicide: A systematic review

2021· review· en· W3172362437 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Psychology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySuicide preventionPopulationMedicinePoison controlClinical psychologyMedical emergencyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Gatekeeper training (GKT) is an important suicide prevention strategy. Studies have evaluated the effectiveness of GKT in different populations, often neglecting family and friends who play a vital role in caring for people with suicide risk. This review evaluated GKT programs targeting family and friends to determine their effectiveness in this specific population. METHODS: Academic databases were searched for studies on GKT programs. Programs involving family and friends caring for people with suicide risk were assessed for any impact on knowledge, self-efficacy, attitudes, and suicide prevention skills. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were reviewed. GKT showed significant gains on outcomes of interest. Three studies targeted family and friends, with one involving them in program creation and conduction and another adjusting the program after their input. CONCLUSIONS: GKT programs have potentially positive effects on family and friends caring for people with suicide risk. Few programs address the specific needs of this group, and programs adapted specifically for them are scarce. Future program development recommendations are discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.259
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it