美国具有代表性的成人样本中不同职业对自杀看法的差异,2002-2021 年综合社会调查》(General Social Survey 2002-2021)。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Archives of Suicide Research Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-14 DOI:10.1080/13811118.2023.2190363
John R Blosnich, Alexandra M Haydinger, Harmony Rhoades, Susan M De Luca
{"title":"美国具有代表性的成人样本中不同职业对自杀看法的差异,2002-2021 年综合社会调查》(General Social Survey 2002-2021)。","authors":"John R Blosnich, Alexandra M Haydinger, Harmony Rhoades, Susan M De Luca","doi":"10.1080/13811118.2023.2190363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Beliefs about suicide are important aspects of suicide prevention gatekeeper trainings. This study sought to determine if workers in finance- and legal/judicial-related industries have significantly different levels of suicide acceptability compared to the general US population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Cross-sectional data are from the 2002 to 2021 General Social Survey (GSS). Suicide acceptability was measured with four dichotomous items to which respondents indicated yes/no if they thought someone has the right to end their life in four negative life scenarios. Occupational categories were coded based on U.S. Census Bureau occupation and industry codes. Covariates for multiple logistic regression analyses included age, educational attainment, sex, race, ethnicity, survey year, and religiosity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 15,166 respondents, 651 people worked in finance-related occupations and 319 people worked in legal/judicial-related occupations. In adjusted models, people in finance-related occupations had greater odds of endorsing suicide as acceptable if one has an incurable disease (aOR = 1.25, 95%CI = 1.03-1.52) and marginally greater odds of endorsing suicide as acceptable if one dishonors their family (aOR = 1.31, 95%CI = 0.99-1.74) than the general adult population. People in legal/judicial-related occupations were more likely to endorse 3 of the 4 suicide acceptability items compared to the general adult population, however these differences were not statistically significant after accounting for demographic factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Workers in non-clinical industries that frequently see clients during negative life events are prime audiences for gatekeeper trainings but may have entrenched beliefs about suicide acceptability. Research is needed to determine how these beliefs may impact gatekeeper training.</p>","PeriodicalId":8325,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Suicide Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10500038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Beliefs About Suicide by Occupation in a Representative Sample of Adults in the United States, General Social Survey 2002-2021.\",\"authors\":\"John R Blosnich, Alexandra M Haydinger, Harmony Rhoades, Susan M De Luca\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13811118.2023.2190363\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Beliefs about suicide are important aspects of suicide prevention gatekeeper trainings. This study sought to determine if workers in finance- and legal/judicial-related industries have significantly different levels of suicide acceptability compared to the general US population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Cross-sectional data are from the 2002 to 2021 General Social Survey (GSS). Suicide acceptability was measured with four dichotomous items to which respondents indicated yes/no if they thought someone has the right to end their life in four negative life scenarios. Occupational categories were coded based on U.S. Census Bureau occupation and industry codes. Covariates for multiple logistic regression analyses included age, educational attainment, sex, race, ethnicity, survey year, and religiosity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 15,166 respondents, 651 people worked in finance-related occupations and 319 people worked in legal/judicial-related occupations. In adjusted models, people in finance-related occupations had greater odds of endorsing suicide as acceptable if one has an incurable disease (aOR = 1.25, 95%CI = 1.03-1.52) and marginally greater odds of endorsing suicide as acceptable if one dishonors their family (aOR = 1.31, 95%CI = 0.99-1.74) than the general adult population. People in legal/judicial-related occupations were more likely to endorse 3 of the 4 suicide acceptability items compared to the general adult population, however these differences were not statistically significant after accounting for demographic factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Workers in non-clinical industries that frequently see clients during negative life events are prime audiences for gatekeeper trainings but may have entrenched beliefs about suicide acceptability. Research is needed to determine how these beliefs may impact gatekeeper training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8325,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Suicide Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10500038/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Suicide Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2023.2190363\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Suicide Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2023.2190363","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:对自杀的看法是自杀预防把关人培训的重要方面。本研究旨在确定金融和法律/司法相关行业的工作人员与美国普通人群相比,是否在自杀可接受性方面存在显著差异:方法:横截面数据来自 2002 年至 2021 年的一般社会调查(GSS)。自杀可接受性通过四个二分法项目进行测量,受访者在这四个二分法项目中回答 "是/否",即他们是否认为某人有权在四种负面生活场景中结束自己的生命。职业类别根据美国人口普查局的职业和行业代码进行编码。多元逻辑回归分析的协变量包括年龄、教育程度、性别、种族、民族、调查年份和宗教信仰:在 15,166 名受访者中,651 人从事与金融相关的职业,319 人从事与法律/司法相关的职业。在调整后的模型中,与普通成年人相比,从事金融相关职业的人在患有不治之症的情况下赞同自杀为可接受的几率更高(aOR = 1.25,95%CI = 1.03-1.52),在有损家庭名誉的情况下赞同自杀为可接受的几率略高(aOR = 1.31,95%CI = 0.99-1.74)。与普通成年人相比,从事法律/司法相关职业的人更有可能认可4个自杀可接受性项目中的3个,但在考虑人口统计学因素后,这些差异在统计学上并不显著:结论:在非临床行业工作的人员经常会在发生负面生活事件时见到客户,他们是守门员培训的主要受众,但他们可能对自杀的可接受性有着根深蒂固的观念。需要开展研究以确定这些观念会如何影响把关人培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Differences in Beliefs About Suicide by Occupation in a Representative Sample of Adults in the United States, General Social Survey 2002-2021.

Objective: Beliefs about suicide are important aspects of suicide prevention gatekeeper trainings. This study sought to determine if workers in finance- and legal/judicial-related industries have significantly different levels of suicide acceptability compared to the general US population.

Method: Cross-sectional data are from the 2002 to 2021 General Social Survey (GSS). Suicide acceptability was measured with four dichotomous items to which respondents indicated yes/no if they thought someone has the right to end their life in four negative life scenarios. Occupational categories were coded based on U.S. Census Bureau occupation and industry codes. Covariates for multiple logistic regression analyses included age, educational attainment, sex, race, ethnicity, survey year, and religiosity.

Results: Among the 15,166 respondents, 651 people worked in finance-related occupations and 319 people worked in legal/judicial-related occupations. In adjusted models, people in finance-related occupations had greater odds of endorsing suicide as acceptable if one has an incurable disease (aOR = 1.25, 95%CI = 1.03-1.52) and marginally greater odds of endorsing suicide as acceptable if one dishonors their family (aOR = 1.31, 95%CI = 0.99-1.74) than the general adult population. People in legal/judicial-related occupations were more likely to endorse 3 of the 4 suicide acceptability items compared to the general adult population, however these differences were not statistically significant after accounting for demographic factors.

Conclusion: Workers in non-clinical industries that frequently see clients during negative life events are prime audiences for gatekeeper trainings but may have entrenched beliefs about suicide acceptability. Research is needed to determine how these beliefs may impact gatekeeper training.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Archives of Suicide Research, the official journal of the International Academy of Suicide Research (IASR), is the international journal in the field of suicidology. The journal features original, refereed contributions on the study of suicide, suicidal behavior, its causes and effects, and techniques for prevention. The journal incorporates research-based and theoretical articles contributed by a diverse range of authors interested in investigating the biological, pharmacological, psychiatric, psychological, and sociological aspects of suicide.
期刊最新文献
Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Mediate the Relationship Between Poor Sleep Quality and Suicidal Ideation Among Young Chinese Men. Correction. Perinatal Factors and Their Association with Early-Adulthood Suicidal Behavior in a Brazilian Birth Cohort. Within-Person Relationship between Attenuated Positive Symptoms and Suicidal Ideation among Individuals at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis. The Link between Deployment-Related Injuries and Suicidal Thinking in the Army National Guard: Examining the Role of Perceived Burdensomeness and Hopelessness.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1