MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410185915 · doi:10.2196/63272

Improving Suicidal Ideation Detection in Social Media Posts: Topic Modeling and Synthetic Data Augmentation Approach

2025· article· en· W4410185915 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Hamideh Ghanadian, Isar Nejadgholi, Hussein Al Osman

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsPreprintIdeationSocial mediaSuicidal ideationPsychologyData scienceSociologyComputer scienceSuicide preventionPoison controlWorld Wide WebMedicineCognitive scienceMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In an era dominated by social media conversations, it is pivotal to comprehend how suicide, a critical public health issue, is discussed online. Discussions around suicide often highlight a range of topics, such as mental health challenges, relationship conflicts, and financial distress. However, certain sensitive issues, like those affecting marginalized communities, may be underrepresented in these discussions. This underrepresentation is a critical issue to investigate because it is mainly associated with underserved demographics (eg, racial and sexual minorities), and models trained on such data will underperform on such topics. Objective The objective of this study was to bridge the gap between established psychology literature on suicidal ideation and social media data by analyzing the topics discussed online. Additionally, by generating synthetic data, we aimed to ensure that datasets used for training classifiers have high coverage of critical risk factors to address and adequately represent underrepresented or misrepresented topics. This approach enhances both the quality and diversity of the data used for detecting suicidal ideation in social media conversations. Methods We first performed unsupervised topic modeling to analyze suicide-related data from social media and identify the most frequently discussed topics within the dataset. Next, we conducted a scoping review of established psychology literature to identify core risk factors associated with suicide. Using these identified risk factors, we then performed guided topic modeling on the social media dataset to evaluate the presence and coverage of these factors. After identifying topic biases and gaps in the dataset, we explored the use of generative large language models to create topic-diverse synthetic data for augmentation. Finally, the synthetic dataset was evaluated for readability, complexity, topic diversity, and utility in training machine learning classifiers compared to real-world datasets. Results Our study found that several critical suicide-related topics, particularly those concerning marginalized communities and racism, were significantly underrepresented in the real-world social media data. The introduction of synthetic data, generated using GPT-3.5 Turbo, and the augmented dataset improved topic diversity. The synthetic dataset showed levels of readability and complexity comparable to those of real data. Furthermore, the incorporation of the augmented dataset in fine-tuning classifiers enhanced their ability to detect suicidal ideation, with the F1-score improving from 0.87 to 0.91 on the University of Maryland Reddit Suicidality Dataset test subset and from 0.70 to 0.90 on the synthetic test subset, demonstrating its utility in improving model accuracy for suicidal narrative detection. Conclusions Our results demonstrate that synthetic datasets can be useful to obtain an enriched understanding of online suicide discussions as well as build more accurate machine learning models for suicidal narrative detection on social media.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.169
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207