The sequential mediating roles of alexithymia and interpersonal problems in the relationship between autistic traits and suicidal ideation: evidence from Chinese college students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Although prior studies suggested that higher levels of autistic traits correlated with more suicidal thoughts and behavior, the specific underlying mechanism was not clear. The present study was designed to expand prior findings and test the mediating roles of alexithymia and interpersonal problems on the relation between autistic traits and suicidal ideation among large population-based college samples. Methods: A total of 6,763 college students (including 3,829 females) completed Autism-Spectrum Quotient, Toronto alexithymia Scale-20, Chinese Adolescents Self-Rating Life Events Checklist and Symptom Checklist. Results: 1.54% college students reported high autistic traits and 9.54% college students had suicidal ideation. Autistic traits were positively correlated with suicidal ideation. The sequential mediating effects of alexithymia and interpersonal problems on the relation between autistic traits and suicidal ideation were significant. Conclusion: These findings contribute to our further understanding of how autistic traits affect suicidal ideation in the context of complex risks and outcomes. They are also helpful in the prevention and treatment of suicidal ideation and behaviors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".