MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413106029 · doi:10.1186/s12888-025-07228-x

Suicidality among people with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review

2025· review· en· W4413106029 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alba Sánchez-Gil, Jesús Pérez, Víctor Navarro‐López, Juan Luis Sánchez‐González

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychiatry · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive impairmentPsychologyCognitionPsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a clinical stage between the expected cognitive decline of healthy ageing and dementia. People with MCI experience functional decline, social isolation and emotional symptoms that may increase suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STB). We aimed to explore the relationship between MCI and STB, as well as clinical and socioeconomic factors that may contribute to it. METHODS: To achieve our aims we carried out a comprensive systematic review of the existing scientific literature. We searched the following electronic databases up to June 2024: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web Of Science (WOS) and EMBASE. We employed the Cochrane Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Exposure (ROBINS-E) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess the quality of the eligible studies. RESULTS: An initial search retrieved 1,176 publications; however, only 11 studies met eligibility criteria to be included in the final analysis. The quality of these studies ranged from 3 to 8 out of a maximum score of 9 in the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with a median score of 6. People with a formal diagnosis of MCI showed a higher prevalence of STB than those without such condition or with a more severe cognitive impairment. Comorbid psychiatric disorders, such as depression, other health problems, such as cardiovascular diseases, and a low socioeconomic status and/or poor educational background seemed to contribute to suicide risk in people with MCI. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review suggests that people suffering MCI may be at an increased risk of presenting STB. Suicide prevention programmes for older populations with MCI should advocate for integrated health and social care models to tackle the clinical and social burden of suffering MCI.

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)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207