Dynamic Simulation Models of Suicide and Suicide-Related Behaviors: Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Suicide remains a public health priority worldwide with over 700,000 deaths annually, ranking as a leading cause of death among young adults. Traditional research methodologies have often fallen short in capturing the multifaceted nature of suicide, focusing on isolated risk factors rather than the complex interplay of individual, social, and environmental influences. Recognizing these limitations, there is a growing recognition of the value of dynamic simulation modeling to inform suicide prevention planning. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of existing dynamic models of population-level suicide and suicide-related behaviors, and to summarize their methodologies, applications, and outcomes. METHODS: Eight databases were searched, including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Compendex, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, and medRxiv, from inception to July 2023. We developed a search strategy in consultation with a research librarian. Two reviewers independently conducted the title and abstract and full-text screenings including studies using dynamic modeling methods (eg, System Dynamics and agent-based modeling) for suicide or suicide-related behaviors at the population level, and excluding studies on microbiology, bioinformatics, pharmacology, nondynamic modeling methods, and nonprimary modeling reports (eg, editorials and reviews). Reviewers extracted the data using a standardized form and assessed the quality of reporting using the STRESS (Strengthening the Reporting of Empirical Simulation Studies) guidelines. A narrative synthesis was conducted for the included studies. RESULTS: The search identified 1574 studies, with 22 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including 15 System Dynamics models, 6 agent-based models, and 1 microsimulation model. The studies primarily targeted populations in Australia and the United States, with some focusing on hypothetical scenarios. The models addressed various interventions ranging from specific clinical and health service interventions, such as mental health service capacity increases, to broader social determinants, including employment programs and reduction in access to means of suicide. The studies demonstrated the utility of dynamic models in identifying the synergistic effects of combined interventions and understanding the temporal dynamics of intervention impacts. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic modeling of suicide and suicide-related behaviors, though still an emerging area, is expanding rapidly, adapting to a range of questions, settings, and contexts. While the quality of reporting was overall adequate, some studies lacked detailed reporting on model transparency and reproducibility. This review highlights the potential of dynamic modeling as a tool to support decision-making and to further our understanding of the complex dynamics of suicide and its related behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022346617; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=346617.
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 | 0.011 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".