Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2024
Intimate partner violence and suicide mortality: a cross-sectional study using machine learning and natural language processing of suicide data from 43 states.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kafka Julie M, Moracco Kathryn Elizabeth, Pence Brian W, Trangenstein Pamela J, Fliss Mike Dolan, McNaughton Reyes Luz
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with suicidal ideation, yet it remains unclear how often IPV precipitates suicide mortality. To overcome limitations with national data, we applied novel methods to: (1) document the prevalence of IPV-related suicide in the USA and (2) identify correlates for IPV-related suicide.
METHODS: Using National Violent Death Reporting System data (NVDRS, 2015-2019, n=1 30 550), we recorded IPV circumstances (yes/no) by leveraging prior textual reviews of death narratives and applying a validated natural language processing tool. We could not systematically differentiate IPV perpetration versus victimisation given limited details in NVDRS. Logistic regression compared IPV-related suicides with referent group suicides (no evidence of IPV), stratified by sex.
RESULTS: 7.1% of suicides were IPV related (n=9210), most were isolated suicide events (82.8%, n=7625; ie, not homicide suicide). There were higher odds of IPV circumstances when the decedent had civil legal problems (aOR for men: 3.6 (3.3 to 3.9), aOR for women: 2.6 (2.2 to 3.2)), criminal legal problems (aOR men: 2.3 (2.2 to 2.5), aOR for women: 1.7 (1.4 to 2.1)), or used a firearm (aOR men: 1.9 (1.8 to 2.0), aOR for women: 1.9 (1.7 to 2.1)). There were lower odds of IPV circumstances when the decedent had a current mental health problem (aOR men: 0.7 (0.7 to 0.8), aOR for women: 0.7 (0.6 to 0.8)).
CONCLUSIONS: IPV circumstances contribute to a notable proportion of suicides. IPV-related suicides are distinct from other suicide deaths. Targeted suicide screening and intervention in IPV settings may be beneficial for prevention.
METHODS: Using National Violent Death Reporting System data (NVDRS, 2015-2019, n=1 30 550), we recorded IPV circumstances (yes/no) by leveraging prior textual reviews of death narratives and applying a validated natural language processing tool. We could not systematically differentiate IPV perpetration versus victimisation given limited details in NVDRS. Logistic regression compared IPV-related suicides with referent group suicides (no evidence of IPV), stratified by sex.
RESULTS: 7.1% of suicides were IPV related (n=9210), most were isolated suicide events (82.8%, n=7625; ie, not homicide suicide). There were higher odds of IPV circumstances when the decedent had civil legal problems (aOR for men: 3.6 (3.3 to 3.9), aOR for women: 2.6 (2.2 to 3.2)), criminal legal problems (aOR men: 2.3 (2.2 to 2.5), aOR for women: 1.7 (1.4 to 2.1)), or used a firearm (aOR men: 1.9 (1.8 to 2.0), aOR for women: 1.9 (1.7 to 2.1)). There were lower odds of IPV circumstances when the decedent had a current mental health problem (aOR men: 0.7 (0.7 to 0.8), aOR for women: 0.7 (0.6 to 0.8)).
CONCLUSIONS: IPV circumstances contribute to a notable proportion of suicides. IPV-related suicides are distinct from other suicide deaths. Targeted suicide screening and intervention in IPV settings may be beneficial for prevention.