Battling with Depressive Feelings and Suicidal Ideation: Role of Friendships and Effective Coping in Young Individuals From Hunza Valley, Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed at examining the association between psychological distress, coping strategies, friendship (satisfaction and affection), and suicidal ideation among young individuals of Hunza Valley, Pakistan. The sample of the present study consisted of 117 boys and 278 girls (N = 395). The purposive sampling technique was used to select study participants from different schools and colleges of Hunza valley, Pakistan. The measures of the study included Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), Brief Cope (Carver, 1997), McGill Friendship Questionnaire-Respondent's Affection (Mendelson & Aboud, 2012), and Suicide Ideation Scale (Rudd, 1989). Analysis was carried out using, t-test analysis, regression analysis, and correlation techniques. The findings of the study indicated significant positive relationships between psychological distress (indicated by the presence of depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation), avoidant coping, humor, and suicide ideation. The findings further indicated that female adolescents scored higher on psychological distress and friendship satisfaction whereas males scored higher on friendship affection. Multiple regression analysis showed predictive nature of age, avoidance coping, friendship satisfaction, and suicidal ideation in depressive symptoms among adolescents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".