Myths about suicide - validating the Hungarian version of the Literacy of Suicide Scale (H-LOSS) on a community sample.

Richard Flach, Robert Fodor, Flora Kettel-Fulop, Peter Osvath, Andras Lang

Abstract readValidation Study

In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Richard Flach *Institute of Psychology, University of Pécs, 6 Ifjusag Street, Pécs, Baranya, 7624, Hungary. flach.richard@pte.hu.

Robert Fodor *Ulster University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK.

Flora Kettel-FulopInstitute of Psychology, University of Pécs, 6 Ifjusag Street, Pécs, Baranya, 7624, Hungary.

Peter OsvathDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical School, University of Pecs, Pecs, Hungary.

Andras LangInstitute of Psychology, University of Pécs, 6 Ifjusag Street, Pécs, Baranya, 7624, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuicide was exceptionally high in Hungary in the last century. According to Eurostat, Hungary ranks second in the EU in death by suicide and was among the few countries where the suicidal tendencies increased in 2020. Primary tasks of suicide prevention programs are to develop suicide literacy and dispel myths and misconceptions about suicide. Therefore, the goal of our research was the Hungarian validation of the 26-item Literacy of Suicide Scale (LOSS).

methods749 people (382 female (51.0%), 364 male (48.6%), 3 identify as non-binary or other (0.4%); 4 identifying as transgender (0.5%)) participated in our online cross-sectional survey with a mean age of 32.4 years (SD = 14.5 years). The H-LOSS questionnaire was adapted using the 2PL (two-parameter logistic) model with WLSE (weighted least squares) estimation in item response theory method, similarly to the original English version.

resultsScale unidimensionality was confirmed. Model fit indices and internal reliability indicators were acceptable. Item infit and outfit values were adequate, item discrimination values were within range, but one item had extremely high and three items had extremely low item difficulty parameters. Few items had differential item functioning by age, gender and own suidice attempt.

conclusionsThe H-LOSS scale deemed to be appropriate for assessing suicide literacy in Hungarian speaking samples.

Indexed as

PsychometricsSuicideAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansHungaryMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultItem response theoryLiteracy of suicidePublic populationSuicide preventionValidity

Identifiers

PMID39210328

DOI10.1186/s12889-024-19841-8

PMCPMC11360470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.