Contextual factors associated with country-level suicide mortality in the Americas, 2000–2019: a cross-sectional ecological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The suicide mortality rate in the Region of the Americas has been increasing, while decreasing in all other World Health Organization regions; highlighting the urgent need for enhanced prevention efforts. Gaining a better understanding of population-level contextual factors associated with suicide may aid such efforts. We aimed to evaluate the contextual factors associated with country-level, sex-specific suicide mortality rates in the Region of the Americas for 2000-2019. Methods: Annual sex-specific age-standardized suicide mortality estimates were obtained from the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Health Estimates database. To investigate the sex-specific suicide mortality rate trend over time in the region, we performed joinpoint regression analysis. We then applied a linear mixed model to estimate the effects of specific contextual factors on the suicide mortality rate across countries in the region over time. All potentially relevant contextual factors, obtained from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 covariates and The World Bank, were selected in a step-wise manner. Findings: We found that the mean country-level suicide mortality rate among males in the region decreased as health expenditure per capita and the proportion of the country with a moderate population density increased; and increased as the death rate due to homicide, prevalence of intravenous drug use, risk-weighted prevalence of alcohol use, and unemployment rate increased. The mean country-level suicide mortality rate among females in the region decreased as the number of employed medical doctors per 10,000 population and the proportion of the country with a moderate population density increased; and increased when relative education inequality and unemployment rate increased. Interpretation: Although there was some overlap, the contextual factors that significantly impacted the suicide mortality rate among males and females were largely different, which mirrors the current literature on individual-level risk factors for suicide. Taken together, our data supports that sex should be considered when adapting and testing suicide risk reduction interventions, and when developing national suicide prevention strategies. Funding: This work received no funding.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".