Association of substance use with suicide mortality: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Rates of suicide mortality and substance use have increased globally. We updated and extended existing systematic reviews of the association between substance use and suicide. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the association between substance use and suicide mortality in peer reviewed, longitudinal cohort studies published from 2003 through 2024. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled data were analyzed using a quality effects model. Meta-regression was used to assess the effect of moderation by study quality. Asymmetry in funnel plots and Doi plots were used to detect reporting bias. Findings: : 99 %) overall and in analyses of specific substances. Further disaggregated data were not available to sufficiently explore for potential health inequities across social factors. Conclusions: This meta-analysis highlights that substance misuse remains a significant suicide risk factor. It underscores the need for universal and targeted prevention and equitable access to effective interventions.
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 | 0.017 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".