MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203796757 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0000000000001424

Recent Stressful Life Events and Suicidal Ideation in Schizophrenia

2021· article· en· W3203796757 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidal ideationSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Logistic regressionSuicidal behaviorLongitudinal studyPoison controlCohortStress (linguistics)Cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Half of patients with schizophrenia experience suicidal ideation. Only few studies have examined the effects of recent stress on both current and emergent suicidal ideation.A cohort of 85 patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders was assessed. The study was divided into a cross-sectional and longitudinal arms to test the effect of recent stress on suicidal ideation. Analysis was done using logistic regression models.After correcting for covariates, recent stress had no significant effect on current suicidal ideation. However, increased total stress (odds ratio [OR] = 1.099 [1.032-1.170], p = 0.003) and health-related stress (OR = 1.331 [1.074-1.650], p = 0.009) at follow-up were predictive of emergent suicidal ideation.With this sample size, we were unable to draw firm conclusions regarding the effect of specific life events on suicidal ideation. Further studies involving larger samples that investigate the interplay between several risk factors are needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental DiseaseSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207