ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2024
Prediction of suicide attempts among persons with depression: a population-based case cohort study.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning algorithms and their predictive accuracy for suicide and self-harm: Systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Prediction of self-harm in people with newly-diagnosed depression: development and validation of risk prediction models.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Studies have highlighted the potential importance of modeling interactions for suicide attempt prediction. This case-cohort study identified risk factors for suicide attempts among persons with depression in Denmark using statistical approaches that do (random forests) or do not (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression [LASSO]) model interactions. Cases made a nonfatal suicide attempt (n = 6032) between 1995 and 2015. The comparison subcohort was a 5% random sample of all persons in Denmark on January 1, 1995 (n = 11 963). We used random forests and LASSO for sex-stratified prediction of suicide attempts from demographic variables, psychiatric and somatic diagnoses, and treatments. Poisonings, psychiatric disorders, and medications were important predictors for both sexes. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) values were higher in LASSO models (in men, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.84-0.86; in women, 0.89, 95% C, 0.88-0.90) than random forests (in men, 0.76, 95% CI, 0.74-0.78; in women, 0.79, 95% CI = 0.78-0.81). Automatic detection of interactions via random forests did not result in better model performance than LASSO models that did not model interactions. Due to the complex nature of psychiatric comorbidity and suicide, modeling interactions may not always be the optimal statistical approach to enhancing suicide attempt prediction in high-risk samples. This article is part of a Special Collection on Mental Health.
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.