Prevalence of suicidal ideations and suicide attempts in patients with tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Suicide and suicidal behaviors are reported to be common in patients with Tuberculosis (TB). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantitively assess the prevalence of suicidality and identify the factors associated with suicidality in patients with TB. METHODS: We searched databases PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar for studies that reported the prevalence of suicide, suicidal ideations, or suicide attempts in patients with TB. We assessed the quality of studies with the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Nine studies (8770 participants) were included. Pooled prevalence for current suicidal ideations within the last year was 8.5% [95% CI: 5.8%12.3%]. Pooled prevalence for current suicidal attempts within the last year was 3.1% [2.2%- 4.5%]. Suicide was reported in 0.92% of TB patients at the end of 2 years, whereas 2.2% to 8.4% of all TB deaths were reported due to suicide. Factors associated with suicidality were female gender, TB retreatment, comorbid HIV, presence of another chronic medical illness, psychological distress, and comorbid psychiatric illnesses. CONCLUSION: The prevalence rates of suicidal ideation and attempts were higher in patients with TB than in the general population. Integrating mental health services with TB programs will help develop interventions for high-risk individuals. Prospero registration number: CRD42021281849.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".