Firearms Access among Pediatric Patients at Risk for Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 2,900 youth who die by suicide each year in the United States use a firearm. To inform lethal means safety counseling efforts, this study aimed to describe firearm access among youth deemed at risk for suicide in pediatric medical settings. METHODS: Youth who presented to one of four urban pediatric medical centers were screened for suicide risk and access to firearms. Suicide risk was determined by a positive screen on the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) tool. Firearm access was assessed via a structured questionnaire. RESULTS: This secondary analysis analyzed data from 1065 youth aged 10 to 17 years. Overall, 110 (10.3%) participants screened positive for suicide risk. Among those at risk, 28% (31/110) reported guns kept in or around their home, 8% (9/110) had access to a firearm, and 5% (6/110) reported that bullets were not stored separately from the guns. CONCLUSIONS: Over a quarter of youth at risk for suicide reported a firearm stored in or around their home. To ensure the safety of young people at risk for suicide, clinicians should assess whether youth have access to firearms and conduct lethal means safety counseling with youths, as developmentally appropriate, and their parent/caregivers.HIGHLIGHTS28% of pediatric patients deemed "at risk" for suicide in this study reported a firearm kept in or around their home.Among youth at risk for suicide, 8% reported having access to a firearm.These results add further evidence that it is important for clinicians to conduct lethal means safety counseling with patients and their families.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".