MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396801509 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1395462

A narrative review: suicide and suicidal behaviour in older adults

2024· article· en· W4396801509 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Sadek, Bryan Diaz-Piedra, Leah Saleh, Luke MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicide preventionDepression (economics)PopulationMedicinePoison controlPsychiatryInjury preventionPsychologyGerontologyMedical emergencyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, suicide is a public health concern that claims the lives of many each year. The complex etiology and factors contributing to the risk of suicide make it hard to predict the likelihood of death by suicide. Suicide rates have been increasing over the past 25 years in patients aged 65 years and older, and with the expected increases in the size of the older adult population and the under-detection of suicide risk, these rates may continue to increase. To mitigate and attempt to limit this expected increase, it is important to understand the risk and protective factors of suicide in older adults. This narrative review focuses on individuals above the age of 65 and encompasses relevant peer-reviewed publications from the past 25 years to cover fatal and non-fatal suicidal behaviour. It summarizes several important risk factors for suicide and suicidal behaviors while considering how risk can be detected, assessed, prevented, and mitigated. Screening methods to detect suicide and depression in older adults were examined based on their effectiveness and suitability for use in this population. Lastly, the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates in older adults were described.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207