MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W50736568 · doi:10.1177/070674370505000902

Can Psychiatry Prevent Suicide? Not Yet!

2005· letter· en· W50736568 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Angus H. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychiatryPsychological interventionSuicide preventionIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMental illnessScope (computer science)Poison controlDepression (economics)MedicineMental healthPsychotherapistMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let me begin by saying that I believe psychiatrists can and should play a significant role in the prevention of suicide in Canada. Whether this is currently the case is another question. Dr Lesage has advanced the “pro” opinion on this matter. It is my aim to examine these arguments in terms of scope, accuracy, and future planning. The “pro” part of this debate suggests that psychiatrists can prevent suicide in 3 ways: first, by adopting a shared care model that allows greater collaboration and thus better support for treatment of mental disorders (particularly depression) by general practitioners (GPs); second, by optimizing treatment of depression via the application of clinical management procedures as outlined by the Canadian Psychiatric Association; and third, by collaborating with addiction services, because alcohol and drugs are heavily involved in cases of completed suicide. Scope The merits of these points notwithstanding, they encompass an approach that falls far short of what might be considered comprehensive in regard to suicide prevention. In the first place, all the focus is on treatment of individuals who are actively suicidal and (or) suffer from mental illness. This approach has no room for early detection and intervention, no focus on healthy child development, and no emphasis on community development or ecologic interventions. To be fair, perhaps this is outside the purview of the In Debate section, since the topic refers to what psychiatrists can do, rather than to a comprehensive suicide prevention plan. Second, the focus seems to be on depression, but the evidence shows that virtually all mental disorders are associated with suicidal behaviour (for example, 1). In fact, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder show an equal or higher level of association with suicidal behaviour than does major depression (2,3). Third, it is important to consider suicide–substance abuse comorbidity, but suicide is related to any number of other social problems and conditions, including interpersonal violence, relationship difficulties, unintentional injuries, and being left out of the mainstream (4,5). This suggests that something causal underlies all these conditions, perhaps something social in nature. Finally, although it is reasonable, from the point of view of this journal’s readers, to conceive of a scheme with the medical profession at its centre, not everyone else sees it that way. Other professionals compete with psychiatry and general practice medicine to deliver treatment services—not as team members, but as primary care clinicians. It does not seem sensible either to ignore this or to compete. It should be noted, however, that the primacy of any mental health treatment specialist declines when we consider interventions at the societal level and when we engage in primary prevention with presuicidal children and youth.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.016
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0140.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.016

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies→French-language works237,207→