Shamal Lalvani, Sumra Bari, Nicole L. Vike, Leandros Stefanopoulos, Byoung-Woo Kim, Martin Block, Nicos Maglaveras, Aggelos K. Katsaggelos, Hans C. Breiter
{"title":"Predicting suicidality with small sets of interpretable reward behavior and survey variables","authors":"Shamal Lalvani, Sumra Bari, Nicole L. Vike, Leandros Stefanopoulos, Byoung-Woo Kim, Martin Block, Nicos Maglaveras, Aggelos K. Katsaggelos, Hans C. Breiter","doi":"10.1038/s44220-024-00229-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The prediction of suicidal thought and behavior has met with mixed results. This study of 3,476 de-identified participants (4,019 before data exclusion) quantified the prediction of four suicidal thought and behavior (STB) variables using a short reward/aversion judgment task and a limited set of demographic and mental health surveys. The focus was to produce a simple, quick and objective framework for assessing STB that might be automatable, without the use of big data. A balanced random forest classifier performed better than a Gaussian mixture model and four standard machine learning classifiers for predicting passive suicide ideation, active suicide ideation, suicide planning and planning for safety. Accuracies ranged from 78% to 92% (optimal area under the curve between 0.80 and 0.95) without overfitting, and peak performance was observed for predicting suicide planning. The relative importance of features for prediction showed distinct weighting across judgment variables, contributing between 40% and 64% to prediction per Gini scores. Mediation/moderation analyses showed that depression, anxiety, loneliness and age variables moderated the judgment variables, indicating that the interaction of judgment with mental health and demographic indices is fundamental for the high-accuracy prediction of STB. These findings suggest the feasibility of an efficient and highly scalable system for suicide assessment, without requiring psychiatric records or neural measures. The findings suggest that STB might be understood within a cognitive framework for judgment with quantitative variables whose unique constellation separates passive and active suicidal thought (ideation) from suicide planning and planning for safety. Applying machine learning to an objective framework for suicidality, the authors demonstrate that four suicidal thought and behavior variables can be predicted with high accuracy and may present a scalable system for suicide risk assessment.","PeriodicalId":74247,"journal":{"name":"Nature mental health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44220-024-00229-x.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44220-024-00229-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The prediction of suicidal thought and behavior has met with mixed results. This study of 3,476 de-identified participants (4,019 before data exclusion) quantified the prediction of four suicidal thought and behavior (STB) variables using a short reward/aversion judgment task and a limited set of demographic and mental health surveys. The focus was to produce a simple, quick and objective framework for assessing STB that might be automatable, without the use of big data. A balanced random forest classifier performed better than a Gaussian mixture model and four standard machine learning classifiers for predicting passive suicide ideation, active suicide ideation, suicide planning and planning for safety. Accuracies ranged from 78% to 92% (optimal area under the curve between 0.80 and 0.95) without overfitting, and peak performance was observed for predicting suicide planning. The relative importance of features for prediction showed distinct weighting across judgment variables, contributing between 40% and 64% to prediction per Gini scores. Mediation/moderation analyses showed that depression, anxiety, loneliness and age variables moderated the judgment variables, indicating that the interaction of judgment with mental health and demographic indices is fundamental for the high-accuracy prediction of STB. These findings suggest the feasibility of an efficient and highly scalable system for suicide assessment, without requiring psychiatric records or neural measures. The findings suggest that STB might be understood within a cognitive framework for judgment with quantitative variables whose unique constellation separates passive and active suicidal thought (ideation) from suicide planning and planning for safety. Applying machine learning to an objective framework for suicidality, the authors demonstrate that four suicidal thought and behavior variables can be predicted with high accuracy and may present a scalable system for suicide risk assessment.