Physician suicide demographics and the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify suicide rates and how they relate to demographic factors (sex, race and ethnicity, age, location) among physicians compared to the general population when aggravated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We searched U.S. databases to report global suicide rates and proportionate mortality ratios (PMRs) among U.S. physicians (and non-physicians in health occupations) using National Occupational Mortality Surveillance (NOMS) data and using Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) in the general population. We also reviewed the effects of age, suicide methods and locations, COVID-19 considerations, and potential solutions to current challenges. RESULTS: Between NOMS1 (1985-1998) and NOMS2 (1999-2013), the PMRs for suicide increased in White male physicians (1.77 to 2.03) and Black male physicians (2.50 to 4.24) but decreased in White female physicians (2.66 to 2.42). CONCLUSIONS: The interaction of non-modifiable risk factors, such as sex, race and ethnicity, age, education level/healthcare career, and location, require further investigation. Addressing systemic and organizational problems and personal resilience training are highly recommended, particularly during the additional strain from the COVID-19 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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".