Help‐seeking behavior among adults who attempted or died by suicide in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study aims to determine the relationship between rurality and help-seeking behavior prior to a suicide or suicide attempt. METHODS: Data from 2007 to 2017 were obtained from administrative databases held at ICES, which capture all hospital, emergency department (ED), and general practitioner (GP) visits across Ontario. Rurality was defined using the Rurality Index of Ontario scores. Help-seeking was based on accessing health services 1 year prior to the event. RESULTS: Among those who died by suicide (N = 9848), those living in rural areas were less likely to seek help from a psychiatrist (rural males: AOR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.31-0.57; rural females: AOR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.29-0.97) compared with those living in urban areas. We found a similar association among those who attempted suicide (N = 82,480) (rural males: AOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.43-0.56; rural females: AOR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.46-0.57). Rural males and females were more likely to seek care from an ED for mental health reasons compared with urban males and females. CONCLUSIONS: Among people who died by suicide, those living in rural areas are generally less likely to access psychiatrists and GPs and more likely to access EDs, suggesting that people living in rural areas may have less access to care than their urban counterparts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".