Thirteen years progress: a scoping review of suicide prevention initiatives in post-secondary settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Describe the literature on suicide prevention initiatives (SPIs) in post-secondary settings internationally since 2010. Methods: A scoping review and bibliographic search were conducted across MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data in consultation with a community social work team. Included articles described SPIs in post-secondary settings. Secondary sources and articles unavailable in English were excluded. Results: After identifying 931 citations, 76 articles representing five continents were included. Included articles spanned 2010 to 2023. Most articles represented North America, used quantitative methods, and focused on gatekeepers. SPIs in post-secondary settings were characterized by standardized and commercially available training programs and a wide variety of ‘in-house’ initiatives unique to campus communities. Conclusions: The quantity of research on SPIs in post-secondary settings has not kept pace with escalating mental health issues and the extent to which suicide is an urgent public health issue for young adults.
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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".