Suicide-Related Knowledge among Italian Early Career Psychiatrists and Trainees: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The training of mental health professionals is an important component of suicide-prevention programs. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in different Italian regions to evaluate knowledge of, and attitudes toward, suicide as well as the experience of a patient's suicide or a suicide attempt in early career psychiatrists (ECPs) and trainees (N = 338). The Suicide Knowledge and Skills Questionnaire and the Impact of a Patient's Suicide on Professional and Personal Lives scale were administered. Furthermore, symptoms of intrusion, avoidance, and arousal were examined through the Impact of Event Scale in ECPs and trainees who had experienced the suicide of a patient or a suicide attempt. Participants with training were more confident in the clinical management of suicide-risk patients. The group with experience of a patient's suicide reported more suicide skills except for support and supervision. Finally, the participants who reported a patient's suicide presented a more conservative patient selection, difficulties in relationships, loss of self-esteem, dreams linked to suicide, intrusive thoughts of suicide, guilt, and anger. Our results show that knowledge of, and attitudes toward, suicide are essential in the management of suicide-risk patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".