Cross-sectional Study of Factors Associated With Suicide Ideation in Ontario Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Suicide is the second leading cause of death in Canadian adolescents. The Interpersonal Theory of Suicide attempts to explain suicide etiology and proposes that feelings of perceived burdensomeness or thwarted belongingness lead to suicide ideation, but this has not been extensively studied in adolescents. This study aimed to use the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide to examine factors that may be associated with suicide ideation in adolescents. The factors of interest were school connectedness, perceived availability of support, self-esteem, feelings of worthlessness, feelings of hopelessness, bullying and cyberbullying victimization, substance use, and social media use. Methods Data were from the 2017 Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey, a survey of 7th to 12th graders enrolled in a publicly funded school in Ontario. Weighted multivariate logistic regression of suicide ideation on all exposure variables was conducted. Results 13.6% of students in the sample endorsed having suicidal ideation in the preceding 12 months. Not knowing where to turn to for support, feeling worthless, endorsing low self-esteem, being bullied, and using cannabis were each associated with greater odds of suicide ideation. Feeling hopeless, social media use, using alcohol and tobacco, and being cyberbullied were not associated with suicide ideation in the weighted multivariate logistic regression model. Conclusions This study is consistent with the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide as low self-esteem and feelings of worthlessness, two indicators of perceived burdensomeness, and not knowing where to turn to for support, an indicator of thwarted belongingness, were associated with greater odds of suicide ideation. These findings can help guide interventions aimed at reducing the burden of suicidality during adolescence and demonstrate the need to provide accessible mental health support for youth.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".