2021 International Conference on INnovations in Intelligent SysTems and Applications (INISTA) 2021
DOI: 10.1109/inista52262.2021.9548444
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Techniques for Suicidal Ideation Prediction: a Qualitative Systematic Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The social stigma related to having suicidal ideations has a particularly significant effect. The fear of social stigma has been shown to discourage individuals at risk of suicide from discussing their experiences in person and seeking support [ 22 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Further, it obstructs the extant suicide-risk screening methods, such as questionnaires and interviews, since they require patients to explicitly disclose their intentions to commit suicide [ 27 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The social stigma related to having suicidal ideations has a particularly significant effect. The fear of social stigma has been shown to discourage individuals at risk of suicide from discussing their experiences in person and seeking support [ 22 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Further, it obstructs the extant suicide-risk screening methods, such as questionnaires and interviews, since they require patients to explicitly disclose their intentions to commit suicide [ 27 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, ref. [ 22 ] reviewed eight studies to highlight the feature extraction methods and classifier algorithms used for suicidal ideation prediction. The authors summarized the available datasets constructed from Twitter, Reddit, Vkontakte (Saint Petersburg, Russia), and Tumblr (New York, NY, USA) data, as well as datasets consisting of interview and questionnaire responses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As there is no one-model-fits-all solution, we used a diverse set of ML algorithms, including those that are widely used in the medical informatics field, as shown in previous systematic reviews: decision tree (DT) [77], RF, support vector machine (SVM) [77][78][79], and Logit [78,79] algorithms. Moreover, we used other ML algorithms to increase the diversity of the models: Gaussian Naive Bayes, K-nearest neighbor (KNN), support vector classifier (SVC), AdaBoost, extra tree, multilayer perceptron (MLP) [71], light gradient boosting machine (LGBM) [80], CatBoost [81], and gradient boost (GB) [82].…”
Section: Development and Validation Of The Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As there is no one-model-fit-for-all solution, we used a diverse set of ML algorithms including the algorithms which are widely used in the medical informatics area as shown in the systematic reviews: Decision Trees [34], RF, Support Vector Machine (SVM) [34,35,36], Logistic Regression (Logit) [35,36] algorithms. In addition, we used other classification ML algorithms to increase the diversity of the models: Gaussian Naive Bayes, K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Support Vector Classifier (SVC), AdaBoost, Extra Tree, Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) [79], Light Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) [77], CatBoost [80], Gradient Boost (GB) [81].…”
Section: Development and Validation Of The Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%