Disparities in suicide-related behaviours across sexual orientations by gender: a retrospective cohort study using linked health administrative data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To quantify suicide-related behaviour (SRB) leading to acute care or deaths across heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual individuals using population-representative sample and health administrative data.Methods: We linked data from a population-based survey (n=123,995) to health administrative data (2002-2019), and examined differences in time-to-SRB events across sexual orientations using Cox proportional hazards regression.Results: The crude incidence rates for heterosexuals was 224.67 SRB events/100,000 person-years, while the rates for homosexuals was 664.74, and bisexuals was 5911.88.In fully adjusted (gender-combined) models, bisexual individuals were 2.98 times (95% CI, 2.08-4.27) more likely to have a SRB event, and gay men and lesbians were 2.10 times (95% CI, 1.18-3.71) more likely, compared to heterosexual individuals.Conclusions: In a large, population-based sample of Ontario residents using clinically relevant outcomes, LGB individuals were at elevated risk of SRB events. Increased education among psychiatric professionals is needed to improve awareness and sensitivity towards the elevated risk of LGB SRB events. Further funding and research on interventions to reduce sexual minority SRB is required.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".