Suicidal ideation and suicide attempts among adolescents in Canada based on the 2023 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Research on suicidality among Canadian adolescents in the post-pandemic context is limited. Using national children survey data, this study estimated its prevalence and examined demographic, individual, interpersonal, family, and school-related correlates. Data and methods We analyzed data from 11,899 respondents aged 12–17 years in the 2023 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth. The prevalence of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts was estimated and compared with 2019 data. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between suicidal ideation and related factors. Results In 2023, 8.4% of adolescents reported past 12-month suicidal ideation, and 4.6% reported lifetime suicide attempts. Youth aged 15–17 years had over twice the odds of suicidal ideation and lifetime suicide attempts compared with those aged 12–14 years, with females at higher risk than males (suicidal ideation: 11.7% vs. 5.1%; lifetime suicide attempts: 6.7% vs. 2.5%). The prevalence of suicidality in 2023 was not higher than in 2019 (suicidal ideation: 14.4% vs. 11.4%; lifetime attempts: 6.6% for both years). Poor mental or physical health, substance use, bullying, non-two-parent household, and parental poor mental health associated with higher odds of suicidal ideation, whereas regular family dinners, physical activities, and attending school were associated with lower odds. Suicidal ideation did not differ by school mode (online vs. in-person). Interpretation Suicidality remains prevalent among Canadian adolescents, particularly among females and youth aged 15–17. These findings underscore the need for ongoing, targeted suicide prevention intervention, such as improving mental health, engaging in physical activities, and supporting school attendance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".