ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
Large language models in adolescent suicide prevention: from language signals to accountable action.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adolescent suicide risk is often expressed through language before it becomes visible in clinical encounters, yet current prevention still relies heavily on episodic screening and limited specialist resources. Large language models (LLMs) may help interpret crisis chats, clinical notes, school-counseling records, and online disclosures, but their relevance to public mental health depends on a practical question: can language signals lead to timely and accountable human action? This mini review examines LLMs in adolescent suicide prevention through this Evidence-to-Action perspective. Current evidence is strongest for supervised risk-signal flagging and more preliminary for context summarization and extraction of suicide-related information from unstructured text. Evidence is much weaker for autonomous generative crisis intervention, especially for adolescents. The main barriers are not only technical accuracy, but also adolescent-specific validation, privacy and consent, cultural variation in distress expression, unsafe generated responses, and unclear responsibility after an algorithmic alert. We argue that near-term deployment should remain under human review and should be judged by whether it improves review timeliness, proportional escalation, safety planning, linkage to care, and equity. LLMs may contribute to adolescent suicide prevention only when embedded in clinically accountable and ethically governed systems. As a focused mini review, this paper maps conceptual boundaries and evidence gaps rather than proposing a validated deployment protocol.
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.