MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391816672 · doi:10.1027/0227-5910/a000948

The Development, Progress, and Impact of National Suicide Prevention Strategies Worldwide

2024· review· en· W4391816672 on OpenAlex
Mark Sinyor, Prudence Po Ming Chan, Thomas Niederkrotenthaler, Vanda Scott, Stephen Platt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrisis · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National suicide prevention strategies have been identified as evidence-informed interventions that require multisectoral efforts by governments. This article reviews the rationale for national strategies, the need for a whole-of-government approach, and current progress on national strategies worldwide, including successes and challenges regarding implementation. We highlight the limitations of existing evidence and describe how future research may help to address knowledge gaps. We conclude that national strategies are an important tool for suicide prevention worldwide. However, a more robust evidence base evaluating the impact of strategies on suicide-related outcomes is needed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.355 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it