Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (2SGBTQ) men’s suicidality in Canada: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicide is a leading cause of death in Canada, with men being three times more likely to die from suicide compared with the rest of the population. Among Canadian men, those who are Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (2SGBTQ) are disproportionately impacted by suicidality. Drawing on this growing public health crisis, this current scoping review focuses on Canadian-based 2SGBTQ men to address the research question: What is known about Canadian-based Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (2SGBTQ) men’s experiences with suicidality? Keywords related to “2SGBTQ men” and “suicidality” were searched across five bibliographic databases to derive 25 articles for analysis. Three thematic findings were generated: (a) Methodological Approaches, (b) Social Identities and Stigma, and (c) Psychosocial Health Issues. First, we trace how the study designs, data sources, and sampling methods used in research influence how we know about 2SGBTQ men’s suicidality. Second, we report on anti-gay, anti-trans, and HIV stigma as characterizing the diverse associations between 2SGBTQ men’s multiple social identities and their suicidality risk. Third, we detail how psychosocial health issues, including mental illness, financial precarity, and substance use, exacerbate social stresses and related risks of suicidality for 2SGBTQ men. These findings map understandings about how suicide risk diversely manifests among subgroups of Canadian-based 2SGBTQ men and interconnections between 2SGBTQ men’s social identities, stigma, and their psychosocial health issues. We draw on these learnings to recommend future research priorities regarding 2SGBTQ men’s suicidality, alongside opportunities to advance knowledge to inform targeted suicide prevention 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 | 0.010 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.038 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".