Structural brain alterations associated with suicidal thoughts and behaviors in young people: results across 21 international studies from the ENIGMA Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviours consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Identifying brain differences associated with suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) in young people is critical to understanding their development and generating effective approaches to early intervention and prevention. The ENIGMA Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviours (ENIGMA-STB) consortium analyzed neuroimaging data harmonized across sites to examine brain morphology associated with STBs in youth. Methods First, we examined associations among regional brain structure and STBs, which were assessed in six samples of youth with mood disorders, using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS; N =577). Second, we combined this sample with a larger sample (total 21 sites) in which STBs were assessed using various instruments. MRI metrics were compared among healthy controls without STBs (HC; N =688), clinical controls without STBs (CC; N =648), and young people with psychiatric diagnoses and current suicidal ideation ( N =406). In separate analyses, MRI metrics were compared among HCs ( N =335), CCs ( N =768), and suicide attempters ( N =254). Results In the homogeneous C-SSRS sample, surface area of the frontal pole was lower in young people with mood disorders and history of actual suicide attempts ( N =163) than those without ( N =394; FDR- p <.001; Cohen’s d =.334). When expanding to more clinically heterogeneous samples, we also found lower surface area of the frontal pole in those with a history of suicide attempts (Cohen’s d =.22). Conclusions Lower frontal pole surface area may represent a vulnerability for a suicide attempt; however, more research is needed to understand the nature of its relationship to suicide risk.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".