Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inpatient suicide comprises a proportionately small but clinically important fraction of suicide. This study is intended as a qualitative analysis of the comprehensive English literature, highlighting what is known and what can be done to prevent inpatient suicide. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted on the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and a personal database for articles on cohort series, preferably controlled, of inpatient suicide (not deliberate self-harm or attempted suicide, unless they also dealt specifically with suicide data). RESULTS: A qualitative discussion is presented, based on the findings of the literature searched. CONCLUSIONS: The bulk of inpatient suicides actually occur not on the ward but off premises, when the patient was on leave or had absconded. Peaks occur shortly after admission and discharge. It is possible to reduce suicide risk on the ward by having a safe environment, optimizing patient visibility, supervising patients appropriately, careful assessment, awareness of and respect for suicide risk, good teamwork and communication, and adequate clinical treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".