MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392654656 · doi:10.1080/07481187.2024.2326927

Suicide and the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study of discourse on an online pro-choice for suicide discussion forum

2024· article· en· W4392654656 on OpenAlexaff
Athena Kheibari, Spencer G. Lawson, Kathryn A. Szechy, Robert Sheehan

Bibliographic record

VenueDeath Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicThematic analysisMental healthSuicide preventionPsychologyOptimismSocial mediaPoison controlQualitative researchHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational safety and healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychiatrySocial psychologyMedicineSociologyMedical emergencyPolitical scienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic had a widespread impact on millions of individuals. Many turned to social media as an outlet for sharing personal experiences, such as the impact of the pandemic on suicidality. The purpose of this study was to understand the pandemic’s impact on individuals who discuss their suicidality on social media. Keywords were used to search for discussion threads (N = 118) related to the pandemic on an online pro-choice for suicide forum. Using reflexive thematic analysis, six themes related to the pandemic’s impact on mental health, suicidality, living conditions, and optimism were identified. Examination of the content from pro-choice for suicide forums may yield authentic information on the impact of the pandemic on those considering suicide. This study contributes to our understanding of the nuances of factors impacting mental health and suicidality during the pandemic, including unique risk and protective factors.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDeath StudiesSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207