MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6940186767 · doi:10.7892/boris.42199

Homicide-suicides compared to homicides and suicides: systematic review and meta-analysis.

2013· article· en· W6940186767 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access CRIS of the University of Bern · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoison controlHomicideSuicide preventionInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homicide-suicides, the murder of one or several individuals followed by the suicide of the perpetrator, are rare but have devastating effects on families and communities. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing perpetrators of homicide-suicides with perpetrators of simple homicides and suicides and examined the proportion of firearm use and its correlation with firearm availability. We searched Medline and Embase from inception to July 2012 and identified 27 eligible studies. Perpetrators of homicide-suicides were older and more likely to be male and married to or separated from their victims than perpetrator of simple homicides or suicides. Influence of alcohol and a history of domestic violence or unemployment were less prevalent in homicide-suicides than in homicides. The proportion of firearm use in homicide-suicides varied across countries and was highest in the USA, Switzerland and South Africa, followed by Australia, Canada, The Netherlands and England and Wales, with a strong correlation between the use of firearms and the level of civilian gun ownership in the country. Our results indicate that homicide-suicides represent a distinct entity, with characteristics distinguishing them both from homicides and suicides.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Access CRIS of the University of BernSame topicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbuseFrench-language works237,207