ArticlePloS one2024
Explainable artificial intelligence models for predicting risk of suicide using health administrative data in Quebec.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Machine learning algorithms and their predictive accuracy for suicide and self-harm: Systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Predictive Performance of Machine Learning for Suicide in Adolescents: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of machine learning approaches for suicide‑related outcomes: a meta‑analysis.Annals of general psychiatry · 2026Article
- Large language models for automated and audience-tailored labeling of latent classes.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Association Between Current Suicidal Ideation and Personality Traits: Analysis of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in a Community Mental Health Sample.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Integrating health equity in artificial intelligence for public health in Canada: a rapid narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Specialty-Level Overview of Emerging AI Trends.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suicide is a complex, multidimensional event, and a significant challenge for prevention globally. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have emerged to harness large-scale datasets to enhance risk detection. In order to trust and act upon the predictions made with ML, more intuitive user interfaces must be validated. Thus, Interpretable AI is one of the crucial directions which could allow policy and decision makers to make reasonable and data-driven decisions that can ultimately lead to better mental health services planning and suicide prevention. This research aimed to develop sex-specific ML models for predicting the population risk of suicide and to interpret the models. Data were from the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System (QICDSS), covering up to 98% of the population in the province of Quebec and containing data for over 20,000 suicides between 2002 and 2019. We employed a case-control study design. Individuals were considered cases if they were aged 15+ and had died from suicide between January 1st, 2002, and December 31st, 2019 (n = 18339). Controls were a random sample of 1% of the Quebec population aged 15+ of each year, who were alive on December 31st of each year, from 2002 to 2019 (n = 1,307,370). We included 103 features, including individual, programmatic, systemic, and community factors, measured up to five years prior to the suicide events. We trained and then validated the sex-specific predictive risk model using supervised ML algorithms, including Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) and Multilayer perceptron (MLP). We computed operating characteristics, including sensitivity, specificity, and Positive Predictive Value (PPV). We then generated receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to predict suicides and calibration measures. For interpretability, Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) was used with the global explanation to determine how much the input features contribute to the models' output and the largest absolute coefficients. The best sensitivity was 0.38 with logistic regression for males and 0.47 with MLP for females; the XGBoost Classifier with 0.25 for males and 0.19 for females had the best precision (PPV). This study demonstrated the useful potential of explainable AI models as tools for decision-making and population-level suicide prevention actions. The ML models included individual, programmatic, systemic, and community levels variables available routinely to decision makers and planners in a public managed care system. Caution shall be exercised in the interpretation of variables associated in a predictive model since they are not causal, and other designs are required to establish the value of individual treatments. The next steps are to produce an intuitive user interface for decision makers, planners and other stakeholders like clinicians or representatives of families and people with live experience of suicidal behaviors or death by suicide. For example, how variations in the quality of local area primary care programs for depression or substance use disorders or increased in regional mental health and addiction budgets would lower suicide rates.
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.