Clustering of lifestyle risk factors in relation to suicidal thoughts and behaviors in young adolescents: a cross-national study of 45 low- and middle-income countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prior research has reaffirmed lifestyle risk behaviors to cluster among adolescents. However, the lifestyle cluster effect on suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) was unclear among adolescents in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). No comparison of such associations was conducted across nations. METHODS: Data from 45 LMICs were obtained from the Global School-based Student Health Survey (GSHS) between 2009 and 2019. Lifestyle behavior factors were collected through a structured questionnaire. Suicidal ideation, plan, and attempt were ascertained by three single-item questions. Lifestyle risk scores were calculated via a sufficient dimension reduction technique, and lifestyle risk clusters were constructed using a latent class analysis. Generalized linear mixed models with odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate the lifestyle-STB associations. RESULTS: A total of 229,041 adolescents were included in the final analysis. The weighted prevalence of suicidal ideation, plan, and attempt was 7.37%, 5.81%, and 4.59%, respectively. Compared with the favorable lifestyle group, the unfavorable group had 1.48-, 1.53-, and 3.11-fold greater odds of suicidal ideation (OR = 1.48, 95%CI: 1.30-1.69), plan (OR = 1.53, 95%CI 1.34-1.75), and attempt (OR = 3.11, 95%CI 2.64-3.65). Four clusters of lifestyle risk behaviors were identified, namely healthy lifestyles (H-L), insufficient intake of vegetables and fruit (V-F), frequent consumption of soft drinks and fast food (D-F), and tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking (S-A) clusters. Compared with H-L cluster, V-F cluster was associated with 43% and 42% higher odds of suicidal ideation and plan, followed by S-A cluster (26% for ideation and 20% for plan), but not significant in D-F cluster (P > 0.05). D-F cluster was associated with 2.85-fold increased odds of suicidal attempt, followed by V-F cluster (2.43-fold) and S-A cluster (1.18-fold). CONCLUSIONS: Clustering of lifestyle risk behaviors is informative for risk stratification of STBs in resource-poor settings. Lifestyle-oriented suicide prevention efforts should be initiated among school-attending adolescents in LMICs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".