An Explainable Artificial Intelligence Text Classifier for Suicidality Prediction in Youth Crisis Text Line Users: Development and Validation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Suicide represents a critical public health concern, and machine learning (ML) models offer the potential for identifying at-risk individuals. Recent studies using benchmark datasets and real-world social media data have demonstrated the capability of pretrained large language models in predicting suicidal ideation and behaviors (SIB) in speech and text. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) develop and implement ML methods for predicting SIBs in a real-world crisis helpline dataset, using transformer-based pretrained models as a foundation; (2) evaluate, cross-validate, and benchmark the model against traditional text classification approaches; and (3) train an explainable model to highlight relevant risk-associated features. METHODS: We analyzed chat protocols from adolescents and young adults (aged 14-25 years) seeking assistance from a German crisis helpline. An ML model was developed using a transformer-based language model architecture with pretrained weights and long short-term memory layers. The model predicted suicidal ideation (SI) and advanced suicidal engagement (ASE), as indicated by composite Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale scores. We compared model performance against a classical word-vector-based ML model. We subsequently computed discrimination, calibration, clinical utility, and explainability information using a Shapley Additive Explanations value-based post hoc estimation model. RESULTS: The dataset comprised 1348 help-seeking encounters (1011 for training and 337 for testing). The transformer-based classifier achieved a macroaveraged area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) of 0.89 (95% CI 0.81-0.91) and an overall accuracy of 0.79 (95% CI 0.73-0.99). This performance surpassed the word-vector-based baseline model (AUC-ROC=0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.90; accuracy=0.61, 95% CI 0.61-0.80). The transformer model demonstrated excellent prediction for nonsuicidal sessions (AUC-ROC=0.96, 95% CI 0.96-0.99) and good prediction for SI and ASE, with AUC-ROCs of 0.85 (95% CI 0.97-0.86) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.81-0.88), respectively. The Brier Skill Score indicated a 44% improvement in classification performance over the baseline model. The Shapley Additive Explanations model identified language features predictive of SIBs, including self-reference, negation, expressions of low self-esteem, and absolutist language. CONCLUSIONS: Neural networks using large language model-based transfer learning can accurately identify SI and ASE. The post hoc explainer model revealed language features associated with SI and ASE. Such models may potentially support clinical decision-making in suicide prevention services. Future research should explore multimodal input features and temporal aspects of suicide risk.
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 | 0.005 | 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".