MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408426379 · doi:10.15332/22563067.10721

Conducta suicida y factores asociados en el municipio de Sibaté (2017-2022)

2025· article· es· W4408426379 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy Lorena Echeverry-Bello, Wendy Stefany Salamanca-Sarmiento, Luz Ángela Rojas Bernal, Mariana Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversitas · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta investigación tuvo como objetivo describir la conducta suicida y establecer los factores de riesgo asociados al intento de suicidio en Sibaté, Cundinamarca, durante el período 2017-2022. Para ello, se realizó un estudio de corte transversal retrospectivo que incluyó 280 casos reportados al Sistema Nacional de Vigilancia en Salud Pública y a la Base de Notificación de Eventos en Salud Mental Departamental del municipio de Sibaté. Se establecieron las frecuencias de intento de suicidio, ideación suicida y cutting, se caracterizó la población de estudio de acuerdo con estos desenlaces y se evaluaron los factores asociados al intento de suicidio utilizando un modelo de regresión logística binaria. Se estudiaron 280 pacientes con conducta suicida, observándose un aumento en los reportes a partir del 2020. De estos, 134 personas presentaron intento de suicido, 133 ideación suicida y 13 cutting. El modelo de regresión logística mostró que las personas con conflictos sociales tuvieron 5,91 veces más posibilidades de presentar un intento de suicidio; por el contrario, aquellas con antecedentes de conducta suicida o un historial clínico vieron reducida en un 40 % la posibilidad de intentarlo. La población entre 18 y 28 años presentó la mayor probabilidad (OR 7,06) de realizar un intento de suicidio. Se concluye que la conducta suicida es frecuente en adolescentes y jóvenes adultos en Sibaté, por lo que los programas de prevención en el marco de la salud pública del municipio deben estar adecuados a las necesidades de esta población y requiere el fortalecimiento de las redes de apoyo psicosocial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiversitasSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207