ArticleScientific reports2024
Predicting suicidal ideation from irregular and incomplete time series of questionnaires in a smartphone-based suicide prevention platform: a pilot study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over 700,000 people die by suicide annually. Collecting longitudinal fine-grained data about at-risk individuals, as they occur in the real world, can enhance our understanding of the temporal dynamics of suicide risk, leading to better identification of those in need of immediate intervention. Self-assessment questionnaires were collected over time from 89 at-risk individuals using the EMMA smartphone application. An artificial intelligence (AI) model was trained to assess current level of suicidal ideation (SI), an early indicator of the suicide risk, and to predict its progression in the following days. A key challenge was the unevenly spaced and incomplete nature of the time series data. To address this, the AI was built on a missing value imputation algorithm. The AI successfully distinguished high SI levels from low SI levels both on the current day (AUC = 0.804, F1 = 0.625, MCC = 0.459) and three days in advance (AUC = 0.769, F1 = 0.576, MCC = 0.386). Besides past SI levels, the most significant questions were related to psychological pain, well-being, agitation, emotional tension, and protective factors such as contacts with relatives and leisure activities. This represents a promising step towards early AI-based suicide risk prediction using a smartphone application.
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.