MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410040316 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018129

Adverse childhood experiences and suicidality in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4410040316 on OpenAlexaff
Dawn-Li Blair, Mila Kingsbury, Heidi Eccles, Sara Siddiqi, Georgia Condran, Ishika Obeegadoo, Joseph Murray, Marie‐Claude Geoffroy, Ana Maria B. Menezes, Lindsey Sikora, Ian Colman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAmerican Foundation for Suicide Prevention
KeywordsPoison controlMedicinePopulationPsycINFOCINAHLPsychiatryCritical appraisalSexual abusePhysical abuseSuicide preventionMEDLINEVictimisationChild abuseInjury preventionMeta-analysisSystematic reviewClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Suicide is an important public health problem with a complex aetiology; this includes adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Common to suicide and ACEs research is a lack of evidence from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). This review aims to evaluate associations between ACEs and suicidality in LMICs. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a search for articles investigating associations between any ACEs and suicidal outcomes in LMICs was conducted using Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science on 2 December 2022; updated on 14 January 2025. Cross-sectional or cohort study research articles investigating ACEs prior to age 18 and using population-based, probabilistic or total population, sampling were eligible for inclusion. Suicidal outcomes across the spectrum were eligible for inclusion. Identified records underwent two-step screening by two independent reviewers; data extraction and risk of bias assessment using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools were also completed in duplicate. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled ORs. Articles that could not be meta-analysed were narratively synthesised. Reporting of this review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement. RESULTS: Ultimately, 118 articles were included; all were of low or moderate risk of bias and none reported on suicide mortality. Six ACEs were significantly associated with increased odds of suicidal outcomes: (1) bullying-victimisation, (2) emotional, verbal or psychological abuse victim, (3) parental separation, divorce or death, (4) physical abuse or violence victim, (5) physical attack victim and (6) sexual abuse victim. Significant ORs ranged from 1.19 to 2.61. Positive associations were found across subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Narrative review found statistically significant positive and non-significant associations between ACEs and suicidal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: ACEs are associated with suicidal outcomes in LMICs, highlighting the need for early intervention strategies and multisector public health approaches to reducing ACEs and their potential impacts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207