National suicide management guidelines recommending family-based prevention, intervention and postvention and their association with suicide mortality rates: systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Suicidal behaviour remains a major public health concern and countries have responded by authoring guidelines to help mitigate death by suicide. Guidelines can include family-based recommendations, but evidence for the level and category of family-based involvement that is needed to effectively prevent suicide is unclear. AIMS: To explore the association between family-based recommendations in guidelines and countries' crude suicide rates. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019130195. METHOD: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science and WHO MiNDbank databases and grey literature were searched within the past 20 years (1 January 2000 to 22 June 2020) for national guidelines giving family-based recommendations in any of three categories (prevention, intervention and postvention). RESULTS: We included 63 guidelines from 46 countries. All identified guidelines included at least one family-based recommendation. There were no statistically significant differences seen between mean World Health Organization crude suicide rates for countries that included only one, two or all three categories of family-based recommendations. However, a lower spread of crude suicide rates was seen when guideline recommendations included all three categories (mean crude suicide rates for one category: 11.09 (s.d. = 5.71); for two categories: 13.42 (s.d. = 7.76); for three categories: 10.68 (s.d. = 5.20); P = 0.478). CONCLUSIONS: Countries should work towards a comprehensive national suicide guideline that includes all categories of family-based recommendations. Countries with previously established guidelines should work towards the inclusion of evidence-based recommendations that have clear implementation plans to potentially help lower suicide rates.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".