Literature DB >> 33844698

A direct comparison of theory-driven and machine learning prediction of suicide: A meta-analysis.

Katherine M Schafer1, Grace Kennedy1,2, Austin Gallyer1, Philip Resnik3.   

Abstract

Theoretically-driven models of suicide have long guided suicidology; however, an approach employing machine learning models has recently emerged in the field. Some have suggested that machine learning models yield improved prediction as compared to theoretical approaches, but to date, this has not been investigated in a systematic manner. The present work directly compares widely researched theories of suicide (i.e., BioSocial, Biological, Ideation-to-Action, and Hopelessness Theories) to machine learning models, comparing the accuracy between the two differing approaches. We conducted literature searches using PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar, gathering effect sizes from theoretically-relevant constructs and machine learning models. Eligible studies were longitudinal research articles that predicted suicide ideation, attempts, or death published prior to May 1, 2020. 124 studies met inclusion criteria, corresponding to 330 effect sizes. Theoretically-driven models demonstrated suboptimal prediction of ideation (wOR = 2.87; 95% CI, 2.65-3.09; k = 87), attempts (wOR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.34-1.51; k = 98), and death (wOR = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.15; k = 78). Generally, Ideation-to-Action (wOR = 2.41, 95% CI = 2.21-2.64, k = 60) outperformed Hopelessness (wOR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.71-1.96, k = 98), Biological (wOR = 1.04; 95% CI .97-1.11, k = 100), and BioSocial (wOR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.11-1.58, k = 6) theories. Machine learning provided superior prediction of ideation (wOR = 13.84; 95% CI, 11.95-16.03; k = 33), attempts (wOR = 99.01; 95% CI, 68.10-142.54; k = 27), and death (wOR = 17.29; 95% CI, 12.85-23.27; k = 7). Findings from our study indicated that across all theoretically-driven models, prediction of suicide-related outcomes was suboptimal. Notably, among theories of suicide, theories within the Ideation-to-Action framework provided the most accurate prediction of suicide-related outcomes. When compared to theoretically-driven models, machine learning models provided superior prediction of suicide ideation, attempts, and death.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33844698      PMCID: PMC8041204          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249833

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  27 in total

Review 1.  Toward a biosignature for suicide.

Authors:  Maria A Oquendo; Gregory M Sullivan; Katherin Sudol; Enrique Baca-Garcia; Barbara H Stanley; M Elizabeth Sublette; J John Mann
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 18.112

Review 2.  Risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A meta-analysis of 50 years of research.

Authors:  Joseph C Franklin; Jessica D Ribeiro; Kathryn R Fox; Kate H Bentley; Evan M Kleiman; Xieyining Huang; Katherine M Musacchio; Adam C Jaroszewski; Bernard P Chang; Matthew K Nock
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  The use of machine learning in the study of suicidal and non-suicidal self-injurious thoughts and behaviors: A systematic review.

Authors:  Taylor A Burke; Brooke A Ammerman; Ross Jacobucci
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 4.839

4.  Psychosis as a risk factor for suicidal thoughts and behaviors: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.

Authors:  X Huang; K R Fox; J D Ribeiro; J C Franklin
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 7.723

5.  Predictors of suicide attempts in patients with borderline personality disorder over 16 years of prospective follow-up.

Authors:  M M Wedig; M H Silverman; F R Frankenburg; D Bradford Reich; G Fitzmaurice; M C Zanarini
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 7.723

6.  Suicide in alcoholism. A prospective study of 88 suicides: I. The multidimensional diagnosis at first admission.

Authors:  M Berglund
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1984-09

7.  The dexamethasone suppression test as a predictor of suicidal behavior in unipolar depression.

Authors:  Boghos I Yerevanian; Jamie D Feusner; Ralph J Koek; Jim Mintz
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.839

8.  Depression and hopelessness as risk factors for suicide ideation, attempts and death: meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.

Authors:  Jessica D Ribeiro; Xieyining Huang; Kathryn R Fox; Joseph C Franklin
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 9.319

9.  Demographics as predictors of suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xieyining Huang; Jessica D Ribeiro; Katherine M Musacchio; Joseph C Franklin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  3 in total

1.  Suicides of psychologists and other health professionals: National Violent Death Reporting System data, 2003-2018.

Authors:  Tiffany Li; Megan L Petrik; Rebecca L Freese; William N Robiner
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  2022-04-07

Review 2.  Artificial intelligence and suicide prevention: a systematic review.

Authors:  Alban Lejeune; Aziliz Le Glaz; Pierre-Antoine Perron; Johan Sebti; Enrique Baca-Garcia; Michel Walter; Christophe Lemey; Sofian Berrouiguet
Journal:  Eur Psychiatry       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 5.361

3.  Applying machine learning to explore the association between biological stress and near misses in emergency medicine residents.

Authors:  Sonnet Xu; Judith E Arnetz; Bengt B Arnetz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.