ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Mind the gap: Exploring differences in suicide literacy between cybersuicide and offline suicide.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The highly public nature of cybersuicide contradicts long-held beliefs of offline suicide, which may cause differences in the way people perceive and respond to both of them. However, knowledge of whether and how suicide literacy differs between cybersuicide and offline suicide is limited. Methods: By analyzing social media data, this paper focused on livestreamed suicide and aimed to compare suicide literacy between cybersuicide and offline suicide on three aspects, including false knowledge structure, extent of association with stigma, and linguistic expression pattern. 7,236 Sina Weibo posts with relevant keywords were downloaded and analyzed. First, a content analysis was performed by human coders to determine whether each post reflected suicide-related false knowledge and stigma. Second, a text analysis was conducted using the Simplified Chinese version of LIWC software to automatically extract psycholinguistic features from each post. Third, based on selected features, classification models were developed using machine learning techniques to differentiate false knowledge of cybersuicide from that of offline suicide. Results: Results showed that, first, cybersuicide-related posts generally reflected more false knowledge than offline suicide-related posts ( Discussion: The findings provide evidence of differences in suicide literacy between cybersuicide and offline suicide, and indicate the need for public awareness campaigns that specifically target cybersuicide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.