↓ Skip to main content

Acute Mental Discomfort Associated with Suicide Behavior in a Clinical Sample of Patients with Affective Disorders: Ascertaining Critical Variables Using Artificial Intelligence Tools

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acute Mental Discomfort Associated with Suicide Behavior in a Clinical Sample of Patients with Affective Disorders: Ascertaining Critical Variables Using Artificial Intelligence Tools
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susana Morales, Jorge Barros, Orietta Echávarri, Fabián García, Alex Osses, Claudia Moya, María Paz Maino, Ronit Fischman, Catalina Núñez, Tita Szmulewicz, Alemka Tomicic

Abstract

In efforts to develop reliable methods to detect the likelihood of impending suicidal behaviors, we have proposed the following. To gain a deeper understanding of the state of suicide risk by determining the combination of variables that distinguishes between groups with and without suicide risk. A study involving 707 patients consulting for mental health issues in three health centers in Greater Santiago, Chile. Using 345 variables, an analysis was carried out with artificial intelligence tools, Cross Industry Standard Process for Data Mining processes, and decision tree techniques. The basic algorithm was top-down, and the most suitable division produced by the tree was selected by using the lowest Gini index as a criterion and by looping it until the condition of belonging to the group with suicidal behavior was fulfilled. Four trees distinguishing the groups were obtained, of which the elements of one were analyzed in greater detail, since this tree included both clinical and personality variables. This specific tree consists of six nodes without suicide risk and eight nodes with suicide risk (tree decision 01, accuracy 0.674, precision 0.652, recall 0.678, specificity 0.670, F measure 0.665, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) 73.35%; tree decision 02, accuracy 0.669, precision 0.642, recall 0.694, specificity 0.647, F measure 0.667, ROC AUC 68.91%; tree decision 03, accuracy 0.681, precision 0.675, recall 0.638, specificity 0.721, F measure, 0.656, ROC AUC 65.86%; tree decision 04, accuracy 0.714, precision 0.734, recall 0.628, specificity 0.792, F measure 0.677, ROC AUC 58.85%). This study defines the interactions among a group of variables associated with suicidal ideation and behavior. By using these variables, it may be possible to create a quick and easy-to-use tool. As such, psychotherapeutic interventions could be designed to mitigate the impact of these variables on the emotional state of individuals, thereby reducing eventual risk of suicide. Such interventions may reinforce psychological well-being, feelings of self-worth, and reasons for living, for each individual in certain groups of patients.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 136 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Student > Master 17 13%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 44 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Computer Science 7 5%
Engineering 7 5%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Other 26 19%
Unknown 54 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2017.
All research outputs
#17,873,766
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#6,160
of 10,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#293,520
of 420,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#48
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,095 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.