Predicting suicidality with small sets of interpretable reward behavior and survey variables

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.

Abstract Image

利用少量可解释的奖励行为和调查变量预测自杀倾向
对自杀想法和行为的预测结果不一。本研究对 3,476 名身份不明的参与者(数据排除前为 4,019 人)进行了研究,利用一个简短的奖励/厌恶判断任务和一组有限的人口统计学和心理健康调查,对四个自杀想法和行为(STB)变量进行了量化预测。研究的重点是建立一个简单、快速、客观的 STB 评估框架,该框架无需使用大数据即可实现自动化。在预测被动自杀意念、主动自杀意念、自杀计划和安全计划方面,平衡随机森林分类器的表现优于高斯混合模型和四种标准机器学习分类器。准确率在 78% 到 92% 之间(最佳曲线下面积在 0.80 到 0.95 之间),没有过拟合现象,预测自杀计划的性能达到了顶峰。各特征对预测的相对重要性在不同的判断变量中显示出不同的权重,按吉尼分数计算,对预测的贡献率在 40% 到 64% 之间。调解/调节分析表明,抑郁、焦虑、孤独和年龄变量对判断变量起到了调节作用,这表明判断与心理健康和人口统计指数之间的相互作用是高精度预测 STB 的基础。这些研究结果表明,无需精神病学记录或神经测量,高效、高度可扩展的自杀评估系统是可行的。研究结果表明,STB 可以在认知框架内通过定量变量进行判断,而定量变量的独特组合将被动和主动自杀想法(意念)与自杀计划和安全计划区分开来。作者将机器学习应用到自杀倾向的客观框架中,证明了四个自杀想法和行为变量可以被高精度预测,并可能为自杀风险评估提供一个可扩展的系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信