DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION AMONG FAMILIES OF PEOPLE WITH SUICIDAL BEHAVIOR: AN APPLICATION OF THE CALGARY MODEL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: to describe the events that marked the development process experienced by families of people with suicidal behavior. Methodology: study based on the Calgary Family Assessment Model. The study had the participation of nine families of individuals who used the Suicide Study and Prevention Center located in the city of Salvador - Bahia, Brazil. Online data collection took place between November 2021 and May 2022. The questions were previously structured in a form based on the CFAM framework. Once transcribed, the interviews went through the transcreation and textualization processes. Results: among the categories that emerged, the following stand out: Experience of intra-family violence as a precipitating factor for suicidal behavior in the life cycle of the families; Self-renunciation in favor of caring for a person with suicidal behavior; and Animal bonding as a protective factor for suicidal behavior in the development process experienced by families of people with suicidal behavior. Conclusion: by elucidating such events, it is possible to connect with and intervene in the conflicts, as well as using them as protective factors against suicide attempts.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".