Association Between COVID-19 and Self-Harm: Nationwide Retrospective Ecological Spatiotemporal Study in Metropolitan France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has not been associated with increases in suicidal behavior at the national, regional, or county level. However, previous studies were not conducted on a finer scale or adjusted for ecological factors. Objective: Our objective was to assess the fine-scale spatiotemporal association between self-harm and COVID-19 hospitalizations, while considering ecological factors. Methods: Using the French national hospital discharge database, we extracted data on hospitalizations for self-harm of patients older than 10 years (from 2019 to 2021) or for COVID-19 (from 2020 to 2021) in metropolitan France. We first calculated monthly standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for COVID-19 between March 2020 and December 2021, using a Besag, York, and Mollié spatiotemporal model. Next, we entered the SIRs into an ecological regression in order to test the association between hospital admissions for self-harm and those for COVID-19. Lastly, we adjusted for ecological variables with time lags of 0 to 6 months. Results: Compared with a smoothed SIR of ≤1, smoothed SIRs from 1 to 3, from 3 to 4, and greater than 4 for COVID-19 hospital admissions were associated with a subsequent increase in hospital admissions for self-harm, with a time lag of 2 to 4 months, 4 months, and 6 months, respectively. Conclusions: A high SIR for hospital admissions for COVID-19 was a risk factor for hospital admission for self-harm some months after the epidemic peaks. This finding emphasizes the importance of monitoring and seeking to prevent suicide attempts outside the epidemic peak periods.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".