Evaluating Machine Learning for Predicting Youth Suicidal Behavior up to 1 Year After Contact With Mental-Health Specialty Care

In this article, we assessed the performance of several predictive modeling algorithms of suicide attempt resulting in inpatient hospitalization or suicide among youths ages 9 to 18 (<i>N</i> = 34,528) after contact (6-12 months) with a mental-health specialist in Stockholm, Sweden, from 2006 to 2012. Using 209 predictors across domains (e.g., clinical, demographic, family, neighborhood, social) identified from national registers, we applied standard logistic regression, regularized logistic regression, and machine-learning algorithms (i.e., random forests, gradient boosting, support vector machines). Standard logistic regression (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.72, 0.82]) and random-forest models (AUC = 0.80, 95% CI = [0.74, 0.86]) demonstrated the highest AUCs. Sensitivities ranged from 0.33 (support vector machines) to 0.91 (standard logistic regression). Although the study was underpowered to detect a difference between logistic regression and machinelearning algorithms (outcome prevalence = 0.7%), performance metrics were similar across models. Logistic regression is not clearly worse than machine-learning approaches. Ongoing research is needed to examine how prediction models can augment clinical decision-making.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Psychological Science
Published
2024-12-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026241301298
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.92

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating Machine Learning for Predicting Youth Suicidal Behavior up to 1 Year After Contact With Mental-Health Specialty Care

Clara Hellner, Henrik Larsson, Seena Fazel, Paul Lichtenstein et al.
3 citations
Clinical Psychological Science
Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
1.92
article

Evaluating Machine Learning for Predicting Youth Suicidal Behavior up to 1 Year After Contact With Mental-Health Specialty Care

Clara Hellner, Henrik Larsson, Seena Fazel, Paul Lichtenstein, Martin Cederlöf, Ralf Kuja‐Halkola, Lauren M. O’Reilly, Brian Matthew D'Onofrio, Martin E. Rickert
article en
3 citations

Abstract

In this article, we assessed the performance of several predictive modeling algorithms of suicide attempt resulting in inpatient hospitalization or suicide among youths ages 9 to 18 (<i>N</i> = 34,528) after contact (6-12 months) with a mental-health specialist in Stockholm, Sweden, from 2006 to 2012. Using 209 predictors across domains (e.g., clinical, demographic, family, neighborhood, social) identified from national registers, we applied standard logistic regression, regularized logistic regression, and machine-learning algorithms (i.e., random forests, gradient boosting, support vector machines). Standard logistic regression (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.72, 0.82]) and random-forest models (AUC = 0.80, 95% CI = [0.74, 0.86]) demonstrated the highest AUCs. Sensitivities ranged from 0.33 (support vector machines) to 0.91 (standard logistic regression). Although the study was underpowered to detect a difference between logistic regression and machinelearning algorithms (outcome prevalence = 0.7%), performance metrics were similar across models. Logistic regression is not clearly worse than machine-learning approaches. Ongoing research is needed to examine how prediction models can augment clinical decision-making.

Clinical Psychological ScienceVol. 13(3)
Örebro University (SE), Karolinska Institutet (SE), University of Oxford (GB), Indiana University School of Medicine, Indiana University (US)
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
1.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.